A girl wore bracelets that jangled
a pug found a shoe he mangled
a bookworm found participles that dangle
==========================================================================
DEFINITION AND EXAMPLES OF DANGLING PARTICIPLES
Dangling Participles.
Adjectives ending in -ing (and sometimes -ed) are called
participles and must be used with care. Consider the following sentences:
The robber ran from the policeman, still holding the money in his hands.
After being whipped fiercely, the cook boiled the egg.
Flitting gaily from flower to flower, the football player watched the bee.
If you said the last sentence to the football player's face just the way it's
phrased above, you could end up a bloody lump of pulp lying on the astroturf,
because he might conclude you think he "flits gaily," a thing most
people in his profession don't do, at least in public.
The grammatical problem here rests with the -ing and -ed
words used in these sentences: "holding," "being whipped,"
and "flitting." They are all participles, a type of verbal form that
modifies nouns. The antecedent—that is, the noun to which the participle
refers—must be clear to the readers in order for them to understand what's
being said. Otherwise, an action may be subscribed to the wrong player, such
as "flitting" to athletes. That's called a "dangling participle,"
because it's left "dangling" without a clear antecedent.
Just as with compound subject-verb agreement when "or" links two
or more subjects (see above, #9), proximity shows
the link between a participle and its antecedent in English. In other words,
the participle goes with the noun closest to it, either directly preceding or
following it and the words which go with it in the sentence. In the example
above, "flitting" is clearly intended to go with "bee"—bees,
after all, naturally flit—but because the closest noun to "flitting"
is "the football player," the sentence seems to suggest that the athlete
is doing the flitting, not the bee. The sentence should read "The football
player watched the bee flitting gaily from flower to flower." Can you see
how to correct the problems with the dangling participles in the other two examples?
In academic writing, dangling participles can cause serious misunderstandings,
which is why I dwell on them here. Consider the following sentence: "After
winning the Peloponnesian war, Athens was ruled briefly by the Spartans."
By juxtaposing "winning" and "Athens," the sentence implies
that Athens won the Peloponnesian War, which is wrong. The Spartans won the
war. The sentence should be rephrased so that the participle is closer to the
Spartans than to Athens: "After winning the Peloponnesian War, the Spartans
ruled Athens briefly." Or, you can just rewrite the sentence and not use
a participle: "After the Spartans won the Peloponnesian War, Athens was
briefly in their control." Remember that precision is at a premium when
writing history!"—or better, "when you're writing history."
NOTE on "considering" and "focusing." Difficulties frequently arise from the misuse of two common participles, "considering" and "focusing," which often end up dangling. Consider this: "Considering the Assyrians' brutal policies toward foreigners, their catastrophic fall in 612 BCE comes as no surprise." What exactly is the writer of this sentence saying? "Considering" means literally "thinking about." So, who is doing the "thinking" in this sentence? Because "fall" is the noun nearest "considering," the sentence implies that the "fall" is doing the "thinking." But that makes no sense. "Falls" can't think; they just happen. Clearly the writer means to say that we (i.e. historians) are "considering." Thus, the statement needs to be rephrased: "Considering the Assyrians' brutal policies toward foreigners, we cannot be surprised by their catastrophic fall in 612 BCE." Now, we are "thinking," which is always good.
Another participle often entangled in similar trouble is "focusing."
This example is taken directly from a student's paper I read: "While still
focusing on the Greeks, the Persians were also a major civilization
in antiquity." Do you see the problem here? As the Persians built their
civilization, do you think they were "focusing" on Greece? That is,
were they "looking at" the Greeks when they were building Persia.
"Looking at" is, after all, what "focusing" literally means.
So,
can you correct this sentence in such a way that the participle isn't "dangling"?*
*Here's one way to repair the participle. Clearly the writer
means we—that is, historians in general—are doing the "focusing,"
so "we" needs to be introduced into the sentence, just as was done
before: "While still focusing on the Greeks, we must admit the Persians
were also a major civilization in antiquity."
from"Writing Skills"
No comments:
Post a Comment