Don’t worry about big, conspicuous errors

Do you worry that someday you’ll make a big, conspicuous error and embarrass yourself publicly?

Stop worrying about that.

If you write a lot, you almost certainly will make such an error someday, but you shouldn’t feel too embarrassed when it happens. You see, if you have made a habit of clear writing, your loyal readers will chuckle at, and immediately forgive you for, the occasional big error.*

If you must worry about something, worry about leaving a residue of small errors in every paragraph, bogging down your reader. Most readers do not forgive that.

A recent article, “Arne Duncan vs. Oklahoma,” illustrates what I mean. Here are the first four paragraphs of the article (minus the links), with my comments:

“In yet another stunning example of his lack of knowledge about life outside the elitist Washington bubble, [United States Secretary of Education] Arne Duncan came out swinging at Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin during a press conference yesterday (6/9) for signing the bill (HB3399) to end the Common Core State Standards initiative in Oklahoma.”

The phrase “came out swinging” is ambiguous: What exactly did Mr. Duncan say or do?

“Apparently, pure politics caused the governor (current Chair of the National Governor’s Association, who along with the Council of Chief School Officers propelled a set of education standards into national lexicon) to abandon Common Core for her state.  Apparently the thousands of parents who wrote letters, sent emails and called Governor Fallin’s office urging her to sign HB3399 during the interim between passage (5/23) and signing (6/5), have been downgraded to political widgets in a game of chicken between a state and the federal government.”

The reader has to read quite a lot of this paragraph before he recognizes that the author is being ironic.

“It’s interesting how quickly the anti-Common Core forces, once vilified as ‘conspiracy theorists’, ‘fearmongers’ and ‘liars’ have become vindicated since – and by Duncan’s own hand no less.  Duncan’s latest temper tantrum can’t help but make it readily apparent to even the passing skeptic that there must be something to the legions of arguments connecting Common Core and federal overreach into public education.”

The reader wonders how these “anti-Common Core forces” are related to “the thousands of parents who wrote letters…”

“Truly, no one (including the Fordham Institute or Bill Gates) has been able to effectively mount an argument supporting the stake the U.S. Department of Education has in Oklahoma’s education standards. Really, what does Arne Duncan care what standards Oklahoma uses to educate its children? What difference can it mean to Duncan?”

It is difficult for the reader to infer a connection between the first sentence and the second and third sentences. My guess is that the author is trying to say, “The U.S. Department of Education has no stake in Oklahoma’s education standards, so Mr. Duncan should mind his own business and stop threatening Governor Fallin.”

The rest of the article is similarly confusing. In almost every paragraph, something impedes the reader: an awkward sentence, an overloaded sentence, an ambiguous verb, a confusing transition, a misplaced modifier.

The Takeaway: Put your energy into making every paragraph readable and clear. Your reader will notice and appreciate it. If you leave a residue of small errors in paragraph after paragraph, your reader will tire of slogging through it. He may even vow never to read another piece with your name on it.

See disclaimer.

_____________
*I relate this personal example in all modesty: Decades ago I was a PR man for Honeywell. One day, while I was visiting with the editor of a trade magazine, I noticed a Honeywell press release posted on a bulletin board. Looking more closely, I recognized it as a release in which I had made a grammar error – in the headline! I groaned. The editor smiled, shook his head, and said, “We see errors like this every day. This one was worth posting because it was from you.”

Placement of modifiers (14)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear (and annoying) writing. Don’t make your readers rely on interpretation or guesswork.

Example of the careless placement of a modifier

An article in the Los Angeles Times includes this sentence:

“Drivers who cause accidents in at least 50 cities can be billed for the police and firefighters who show up.”

The reader chuckles and thinks:

“I can’t imagine a driver actually becoming liable for one of these bills. He would have to have caused at least 50 accidents – at least one accident in each of 50 cities – before he would become liable. To reach this highly unlikely achievement, a driver would have to have survived 50 accidents; have made 50 auto repairs or replacements (or have stolen his cars); have paid high insurance premiums for driving without insurance; have probably spent time in prison for repeat offenses such as driving without a license, grand theft auto, reckless endangerment, assault and battery with a motor vehicle, and vehicular homicide.”

Then the reader may stop chuckling and think:

“Perhaps this fool meant to write, “In at least 50 cities, drivers who cause accidents can be billed for the police and firefighters who show up.”

The Takeaway: Place every modifier carefully. When a modifier is a phrase, construct the phrase carefully. Making your readers work harder to read a sentence than you worked to write it is indolent and rude. Your readers may resent you for it. Or, if you are lucky, they may only laugh at you.

See disclaimer.

Placement of modifiers (13)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear (and annoying) writing. Don’t make your readers rely on interpretation or guesswork.

Example of the careless placement of a modifier

An article in an online newsletter includes this sentence:

“Perhaps attempting to persuade its powerful neighbor to the North to do the same, last month, major revisions to Mexico’s immigration laws came into effect.”

The reader thinks:

“The phrase ‘Perhaps attempting to persuade its powerful neighbor to the North to do the same’ appears to modify the nearby noun revisions. But that wouldn’t be logical; revisions don’t attempt to do anything. So maybe it modifies Mexico’s. But wait, that’s a possessive. So, maybe the phrase modifies the verb came. But how could that be logical?”

Then the reader – if he is patient with careless writers – may think:

“I’ll mentally recast the sentence according to this writer’s most likely meaning: ‘Mexico made major revisions to its immigration laws, which came into effect last month. In making these revisions, Mexico may have been attempting to persuade its powerful neighbor to the North to do likewise.’ ”

The Takeaway: Place every modifier carefully. When a modifier is a phrase, construct the phrase carefully. If you make your readers work harder to read a sentence than you worked to write it, they may resent you for it. If you are lucky, they may only laugh at you.

See disclaimer.

Placement of modifiers (12)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear (and annoying) writing. Don’t make your readers rely on interpretation or guesswork.

Example of the careless placement of a modifier

An article about the 2009-2010 Toyota recalls contains this paragraph:

“Now, the agents of the government, which controls GM, are publicly castigating Toyota in an attempt to smear the company and increase their own profitability. As a direct competitor with Toyota by way of involvement with GM, the assault against Toyota represents one of the most public conflicts of interests the business world has experienced.” (Boldface added.)

Critique of the example

The reader may correctly guess that “As a direct competitor with Toyota by way of involvement with GM” is a prepositional phrase acting as an adverb and modifying the verb represents. The reader also may correctly guess that the preposition as at the beginning of the prepositional phrase probably means “in the role of” and therefore must refer to a person or group of persons, specifically the person or group of persons that represents. But this person or group of persons is not present in the sentence; the subject of the verb represents is the word assault.

If the reader is persistent, he may look back and guess that the preposition as probably refers to government, which is a group of persons and could logically and grammatically be the subject of the verb represents.

The second sentence should have been something like this:

Because the government is a direct competitor with Toyota by way of involvement with GM, its assault on Toyota is a conflict of interest.

The Takeaway: Place every modifier carefully. When a modifier is a phrase, construct the phrase carefully. Making your readers work harder to read a sentence than you worked to write it is indolent and rude. Your readers may resent you for it.

See disclaimer.

General silliness

At a general store in Vermont, the bulletin board displays a poster that advertises a house-cleaner. The third sentence in the ad is: “Good with my hand.”

Oddly enough, a nearby ad also mentions dexterity: A photographer offers “Hand-signed bear family photos.”

And speaking of clever animals, I notice that some chickens in Italy become inspired by their owners: “Tuscan-inspired chicken.”

The Takeaway: Have a great day.

Placement of modifiers (11)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear writing. Place your modifiers as close as possible to what they modify. Don’t make your readers rely on interpretation or guesswork.

Example of the careless placement of a modifier

A recent essay discusses the career of talk-show host Glenn Beck. The essay contains this sentence:

“Much like the Founding Fathers, I believe Beck has committed himself to using his fame, his fortune and his enormous talents to help defeat the poisonous progressive movement that is fundamentally transforming the United States into a destitute socialist nation.”

Critique of the example

The reader immediately becomes confused when he sees that the adverbial phrase “Much like the Founding Fathers” does not modify the nearest verb: believe. For if it did modify believe, it would imply that the author is saying that what he believes about Glenn Beck is what the Founding Fathers believed about Glenn Beck. But Mr. Beck was born after the Founding Fathers had died.

So the reader tries the next verb: has committed. This interpretation would imply that the author is saying that the Founding Fathers tried to help defeat the progressive movement. But the progressive movement began in the early 20th century, after the Founding Fathers had died. Another anachronism.

Anachronism also eliminates the third, fourth and fifth verbs: using (gerund), to help defeat, and is … transforming, respectively, which are all subordinate to has committed.

Nor does the adverbial phrase modify the adverb (fundamentally) or any of the adjectives (enormous, poisonous, progressive, united, destitute, and socialist).

At this point, the reader tries some psychology and intuition; he asks himself, Why is this author comparing the Founding Fathers with Glenn Beck? What did he seize on, as a point of comparison, however tenuous, that prompted him to write this dopey sentence?

The reader pauses on the word fortune. It is the second noun in a three-noun series: fame, fortune, talents. Dum-de-dum, fortune, dum-de-dum. Ah, there it is! The author is alluding to the Declaration of Independence, in which the Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and honor to each other in support of their cause.* Mr. Beck is committing his fame, fortune and talents to his cause.

And so, after having spent a lot more time deciphering the sentence than the author probably spent writing it, the reader guesses that the author meant to say something like this:

The Founding Fathers seceded from the British monarchy and formed a new government; Glenn Beck is trying to help defeat the progressive movement. The Founding Fathers used rifles; Glenn Beck is using his mouth. They pledged their lives, fortunes and honor; he’s committing his fortune (not his life or honor).

The Takeaway: Place every modifier so that readers can easily identify what you intend to modify and what you do not intend to modify. Making your readers work harder to read a sentence than you worked to write it is bad manners; your readers will judge you on it.

See disclaimer.

*“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Placement of modifiers (10)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear writing. Place your modifiers as close as possible to what they modify. Don’t make your readers rely on an interpretation of the context or on guesswork.

Here’s an example of the careless placement of a modifier.

Example

A bill (H4509) introduced in the South Carolina General Assembly on February 2 contains this language:

“Federal agents have flouted the United States Constitution and foresworn their oath to support this Constitution by requiring registration of the purchasers of firearms and ammunition, and these requirements violate the limits of authority placed upon the federal agents by the United States Constitution and are dangerous to the liberties of the people…”

The adverbial phrase “by requiring registration of the purchasers of firearms and ammunition” appears only three words after the verb “to support” and therefore could easily be interpreted as modifying “to support.”

However, the context suggests that the bill-writers intended the adverbial phrase to modify the verbs “have flouted” and “[have] foresworn,” which are farther back in the sentence.

If they did intend to modify “have flouted” and “[have] foresworn,” they should have placed the adverbial phrase closer to those verbs than to the verb “to support.” For example, they should have written something like this:

By requiring registration of the purchasers of firearms and ammunition, federal agents have flouted the United States Constitution and foresworn their oath to support this Constitution. These requirements violate the limits of authority placed upon the federal agents by the United States Constitution and are dangerous to the liberties of the people…

The Takeaway: Place every modifier so that the reader can easily identify what you intend to modify and what you do not intend to modify. Don’t make your readers work harder to read the sentence than you worked to write it.

Placement of modifiers (9)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear writing. When you place a modifier carelessly, you force your readers to guess what you mean to modify.

If you force them to do that, many readers will conclude that you are inconsiderate, indolent or stupid. Don’t take the risk; do it right.

Here’s a good example of careless placement of a modifier.

Example

When the Telegraph (UK) covered the recent gatecrashing at the White House, the report included this sentence:

“The couple, described as aspiring reality TV stars and polo-playing socialites, were photographed arriving at the White House.”

Almost all readers will conclude that “aspiring” is meant to modify the phrase “reality TV stars,” because the phrase immediately follows the modifier. This conclusion will almost certainly be correct.

However, many readers will be unsure about “polo-playing socialites.” When a modifier precedes two phrases separated by and, the modifier usually is meant to modify both phrases.

But the context here suggests that “aspiring” does not modify “polo-playing socialites.” The context implies that the gatecrashers (pictured) are already “polo-playing socialites” and are aspiring to become “reality TV stars” in addition. In other words, it implies that they have time on their hands, that they pass the time giving lavish parties and riding expensive horses, and that they would like to add a third social-climbing pastime.

If that is true, and if the Telegraph reporter knew it, he should have written this, or something like this:

The couple, described as polo-playing socialites and aspiring reality TV stars, were photographed arriving at the White House.

The Takeaway: Place every modifier so that the reader can easily identify what you intend to modify and what you do not intend to modify. Don’t make your readers work harder to read the sentence than you worked to write it.

Placement of modifiers (8)

Careless placement of modifiers is a frequent cause of unclear writing. A misplaced modifier, also called a dangling modifier, forces the reader to guess what the modifier is intended to modify.

Example of a dangling modifier

A recent article contained this dangling modifier:

“Financially crippled due to our continued wars for empire and the printing of billions of new dollars to repay political cronies in the financial world has left us in a precarious position in Afghanistan.” (Boldface added.)

When the reader begins reading this sentence, he sees the adverb “[f]inancially,” which clearly modifies the next word, the past participle “crippled.” So far, so good.

Next, the reader naturally expects to encounter the word or phrase that the participle “crippled” modifies. Who or what has been crippled?

A word or phrase modified by a participle usually appears immediately after the participle, as in Robert Browning’s classic line, “Smiling the boy fell dead.”

Or if not immediately, soon.

But in our example, the modified word or phrase does not appear immediately or soon.

After the modifier “crippled,” the reader has to slog through 23 words that modify the modifier:

“…due to our continued wars for empire and the printing of billions of new dollars to repay political cronies in the financial world…”

The reader now has read a total of 25 words (enough to create an overly long sentence) and is still waiting to find out who or what has been crippled.

But he will not learn it from the author, who immediately introduces the main verb: “has left.”

Apparently, the author has forgotten that he began the sentence with the modifier “crippled.” As a result, he has forgotten to specify the word or phrase modified by that modifier.

He has also forgotten to specify a subject for the main verb: Who or what “has left us in a precarious position in Afghanistan”? And to whom does the direct object “us” refer?

Well, I know that:

• In this article, the author frequently uses the pronoun “we,” often in connection with wars waged by the U.S. Government.

• According to the bio at the end of the article, the author is a retired soldier of the U.S. Government and participated in one of the wars mentioned in the article.

But it is highly probable that many of his readers have never been soldiers of the U.S. Government and did not participate in any of the wars mentioned. The author surely knows this.

Therefore, I will guess that, by “we,” the author does not mean “my fellow soldiers and I” or “you readers and I.”

He probably means “the U.S. Government.” The U.S. Government is an “it,” but many people mistakenly call it “we,” just as they mistakenly call the nearest Major League Baseball franchise “we.”

So, here’s my suggested rewrite:

Financially crippled by its continued inflating and war making, the U.S. Government has left itself in a precarious position in Afghanistan.

The Takeaway: Avoid dangling modifiers. Place every modifier close to the word or phrase it modifies. If that isn’t possible, recast the sentence. Don’t make your readers work harder to read the sentence than you worked to write it.

Placement of modifiers (7)

When we misplace modifiers, we often create unintentional humor – and thereby distract our readers. For example, a recent article in The New York Times (registration required) included this sentence:

“Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.”

Better:

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones. The company hopes to sell its test to forensics laboratories.

This rewrite is two words longer than the original. We give up a little concision to gain a lot more clarity. A worthy trade-off.

The Takeaway: To avoid unintentional humor, avoid misplaced modifiers. Place every modifier close to the word or phrase it modifies. If that isn’t possible, and you think the reader may associate the modifier with the wrong word or phrase, then recast or break up the sentence.

Placement of modifiers (6)

Misplaced modifiers will annoy your readers. So will dangling modifiers. So will modifiers that could be misplaced modifiers or dangling modifiers.

Here’s an example from The Wall Street Journal. In an online news alert today, the Journal reported recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. The last item in the alert was this:

“Justices have yet to rule on a case involving a New Haven, Conn., decision to scrap the results of a firefighter test over race. The court is expected to release its decision by next week.”

The writer of this alert has left it up to the reader to guess which noun or verb the prepositional phrase over race modifies.

If it modifies to rule, case, decision, to scrap, or results, then over race is a misplaced modifier.

If it modifies a noun or verb that does not appear in the same sentence, then over race is a dangling modifier.

If it modifies test, which immediately precedes it in the sentence, then over race is neither a misplaced modifier nor a dangling modifier. However, the reader is left to guess the logic: what kind of test is a “test over race”?

The Takeaway: Respect your readers’ time and intelligence. Avoid misplaced modifiers and dangling modifiers. Place every modifier close to the word being modified. And be sure the logic of your modifiers is clear.

Placement of modifiers (5)

Clear writing requires, among many other things, the correct placement of modifiers. Incorrect modifier placement can confuse your readers. It can also introduce unintentional humor into your writing – making you look foolish.

Here’s an example, from today’s Wall Street Journal:

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

“The [Supreme Court] turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.”

The writer has placed the adverb “openly” immediately following the gerund “serving.” By placing it there, he indicates that “openly” modifies “serving.”

Therefore the writer is stating that the Pentagon allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military, but not to serve openly. That is, gays and lesbians must not do or say anything that could reveal or acknowledge that they are serving in the military.

One expects that this policy would be difficult to apply in practice:

“Hi, Mom. Hi, Dad.”

“Welcome home, Son. You look so healthy. How was basic training?”

“Mom, I don’t know what you’re talking about.”

“Basic training. You know. The Army.”

“Sorry.”

“We drove you to Fort Dix. Don’t you remember?”

“Just don’t ask me about this, OK?”

“You were so brave when you ‘came out to us.’ And you know we gave you our full support then, and we still do. Why are you afraid to talk about something as mundane as the Army?”

“I said, just drop it.”

The Takeaway: Respect your readers; place every modifier close to the word being modified. Your correct modifier placement will greatly increase the clarity of your writing. It will also help you avoid introducing unintentional humor.

Placement of modifiers (4)

The incorrect placement of modifiers is a frequent error in writing. Incorrect modifier placement can detract – either slightly or heavily, depending on the context – from the clarity of your writing. If you want to produce clear writing, you must use correct modifier placement. It’s fairly easy.

For example, incorrect modifier placement sometimes involves phrases that begin with As someone who. Here are two incorrect examples and one correct example.

INCORRECT: Misplaced Modifier (near the wrong noun or pronoun)

A contributor to an online forum writes:

“As someone who’s been writing professionally since 2002, you don’t have to tell me what a pain in the ass Microsoft autoeverything is... especially when you have to take your final copy and paste it into a publishing system that doesn’t understand all its ‘special’ characters. Sigh.”

The writer has incorrectly placed the modifying phrase, “As someone who’s been writing professionally since 2002,” immediately before the pronoun “you.” But the phrase actually refers to the writer, and therefore modifies “me.”

This kind of error is also called a misplaced modifier: the word (noun or pronoun) to be modified is included in the sentence but the modifier is placed closer to another word. This misplacement creates a false signal for the reader; the modifier appears to be modifying the wrong word. (Note also that in this case the writer increases the confusion by using “you” again in the same post, but in a different sense.)

The writer should have written something like this:

As someone who’s been writing professionally since 2002, I know what a pain …

INCORRECT: Dangling Modifier (no noun or pronoun)

On the web site of the British treasury, this comment appears:

“As someone who works in sheltered housing for young people with learning difficulties the effect of the closing of special school places particularly residential facilities seems to mean we are getting more referrals from Youth Offending Teams.”

The writer uses the modifying phrase, “As someone who works in sheltered housing for young people with learning difficulties,” but does not include in the sentence any word (noun or pronoun) that the phrase could plausibly modify.

This kind of error is also called a dangling modifier: the word to be modified is not included in the sentence, so the modifer is left “dangling.” A dangling modifier forces readers to guess what word should have been included in the sentence. In this case, most readers will guess that the word is I. The writer should have written something like this:

As someone who works in sheltered housing for young people with learning difficulties, I think that the effect …

CORRECT

On April 08, 2009, I received an email from Amazon.com that begins this way:

“Dear Amazon.com Customer,

“As someone who has purchased or rated books by Daniel Defoe, you might like to know that Sharpe's Sword: Richard Sharpe and the Salamanca Campaign, June and July 1812 is now available.”

The writer of the email has correctly placed the opening phrase, “As someone who has purchased or rated books by Daniel Defoe,” immediately before the pronoun (“you”) that the phrase modifies. The modifier is neither a misplaced modifier nor a dangling modifier. The sentence is quite clear.

The Takeaway: Respect your readers’ time and patience. Avoid misplaced modifiers and dangling modifiers. Place every modifier close to the word being modified. Your correct modifier placement will help readers move effortlessly forward through sentence after sentence. They will appreciate it (even if only unconsciously) and respect you for it. You will be recognized for your clear thinking.

Placement of modifiers (1)
Placement of modifiers (2)
Placement of modifiers (3)

Placement of modifiers (3)

As demonstrated in two previous posts (1), (2), clear writing requires correct placement of modifiers. Fortunately, the rules for placement of modifiers boil down to one simple rule. Here it is:

So far as possible, place modifiers where the reader expects them to be – that is, close to what they modify.

In other words, the placement of modifiers is a matter of common sense. It is a matter of empathy. The greater the separation (as measured in the number of words) between a modifier and what it modifies, the greater the risk of distracting and confusing the reader.

And there is one other factor – besides the separation – that determines the risk of distracting and confusing the reader. This factor is the plausibility of the wrong construction; that is to say, if the reader associates the modifier with the wrong word or phrase, how plausible will that association be?

Here are two examples that demonstrate the point.

EXAMPLE 1: In a travel article in thestar online, we see this paragraph:

“Palmyra was once ruled by Queen Zenobia, a descendant of Cleopatra. She defied Rome and her country was subjugated. All but forgotten, travelers have brought her back to life.”

When the reader reaches the third sentence and encounters the adjectival phrase “All but forgotten,” followed immediately by “travelers,” he assumes (for a moment or two) that “All but forgotten” modifies “travelers.”

But he soon realizes that this assumption is not very plausible. Why would travelers be described as all but forgotten? So the reader looks for some other candidates. He looks back and sees six: “Palmyra,” “Queen Zenobia,” “descendant,” “Cleopatra,” “Rome,” and “country.” The most plausible choice is “Queen Zenobia,” followed by “Palmyra” as a distant second.

So, to be clear, the sentence should read like this, or close to this:

Queen Zenobia [or Palmyra] was nearly forgotten, but travelers have brought her back to life.

EXAMPLE 2: In an electrician’s advertisement on the web, we see these two paragraphs:

“Reactive Electrical Limited, the number 1 Electrician Essex has to offer, is a NICEIC Part “P” approved Domestic Installer offering a full electrical service to domestic, commercial and industrial clients throughout Thurrock in Essex, London and the South East [sic, no period]

“Being part of the Government backed TrustMark Scheme you can be sure of employing a reliable and trustworthy establishment to make improvements and repairs to your property.”

When the reader encounters the participial phrase “Being part of the Government backed TrustMark Scheme,” he assumes temporarily that it modifies the word immediately following it (the pronoun “you”).

Unfortunately for the reader, this incorrect construction is fairly plausible. The reader might logically ask himself, “Did this electrician mean to say that if I am a member of TrustMark, he will be more reliable and trustworthy to me?” Or did he mean to say that his being a member of TrustMark certifies that he is generally more reliable and trustworthy than electricians who are not members?”

The reader might then surf the web and find the TrustMark Scheme’s web site. The web site suggests that the scheme helps homeowners find reliable contractors and obtain good service. So, the reader concludes that it is more plausible that the participial phrase modifies “Reactive Electrical Limited” than “you.”

I would suggest the following revision:

Reactive Electrical Limited is a member of the Government backed TrustMark Scheme. This means you can be sure that Reactive Electrical Limited is a reliable and trustworthy establishment for making improvements and repairs to your property.

The wrong construction was more plausible in Example 2 than in Example 1. Therefore, the reader is more likely to become confused, and to stay confused longer, in Example 2. Therefore the writing in Example 1 is clearer (more precisely, less unclear).

The Takeaway: The correct placement of modifiers is easy. As you write, always try to place modifiers close to what they modify. As you edit, look for places where the reader could easily construe the wrong word or phrase as the thing modified.

Placement of modifiers (1)
Placement of modifiers (2)

Placement of modifiers (2)

Clear writing requires correct placement of all modifiers. A modifier is correctly placed when it is where the reader would expect to see it.

On the Search Engine Optimization page of the Weblink International web site, we see this sentence:

“When optimizing, a web site text is to be written to include prominent keyword phrases for title tags, description tags, keyword tags, alt attribute tags on images, headings and much more.” (Boldface added.)

The reader gathers that “When optimizing” does not modify “a web site text.” Web site text does not optimize itself. But what does “When optimizing” modify? The reader looks at every word in the sentence and sees no logical choice.

Then he realizes what happened. The word being modified does not appear in the sentence at all. It is the word you. It is implied – vaguely implied – in “is to be written to include.”

The writer’s meaning is:

When optimizing, you should include ...

This is clear writing because, when a sentence begins with a modifying word or phrase, the reader expects the next word or phrase to be the word or phrase modified. (Recall Robert Browning’s famous line, “Smiling the boy fell dead.”)

However, the writer could also (more naturally) write:

When optimizing, include ...

It would still be clear writing because, when the reader arrives at the verb include and recognizes the imperative mood, he mentally supplies the pronoun you.

The Takeaway: Always try to place a modifier as close as possible to the word (or phrase) that is being modified. If the word (or phrase) that is being modified is not stated but only implied, try to place the modifier as close as possible to the place where the word is implied.

Placement of modifiers (1)

Placement of modifiers (1)

Clear writing requires correct placement of all modifiers. A modifier is correctly placed when it is where the reader would expect it to be.

In an article entitled “The Never-Ending War on American Freedom,” we see this sentence:

“Woodrow Wilson resumed the totalitarian attacks on free speech that Adams and Lincoln had pioneered with the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918.”

After reading the entire sentence, the reader correctly concludes that the phrase, “with the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918” is used adverbially. But what does it modify? Because it immediately follows the verb pioneered, he may (understandably but incorrectly) conclude that it modifies that verb.

Then, backtracking, the reader sees that the subject of that verb is “Adams and Lincoln.” But he knows that both men were long dead by 1917, so he concludes that the modifying phrase must modify a verb, adverb or adjective earlier in the sentence.

The reader continues to work his way back and sees resumed. Its subject is “Woodrow Wilson.” The reader knows that Dr. Wilson was alive – indeed was President of the United States of America, in 1917 and 1918. Therefore the reader concludes that the modifying phrase, by process of elimination, modifies resumed.

To prevent such confusion and wasted time, the author should have written this, or something close to it:

With the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, Woodrow Wilson resumed the totalitarian attacks on free speech that Adams and Lincoln had pioneered.

The Takeaway: Respect your readers’ time and patience: don’t make them backtrack to analyze your sentences. Try to place every modifier as close as possible to the word being modified, to help readers move steadily forward through sentence after sentence. If you make an occasional mistake, as in the example above, readers will not be offended. But if you habitually place your modifiers carelessly, your arrogance and lack of manners will offend all but the most obtuse readers.