Dangling participles

A "dangling" participle is also known as an "unattached" participle, and sometimes, as a "dangling/unattached modifier".

Before venturing into these stormy waters in your little boat of understanding, make sure you know what a participle and a gerund are.

(1)

Remember, we are talking about an error of syntax, so the following examples consist of sentences that are in need of correction.

Rushing through the hissing rain and dodging the slow-moving people on the sidewalks  with their stupid oversized umbrellas that symbolize the Romans'  complete lack of respect for others, especially for others who might conceivably be in a hurry, it seemed to me that this city was one of the worst places in the world to get  caught in a downpour.

Right, let's parse (= grammatically analyse)  that rather silly sentence. The participles are the words rushing and dodging. By its nature, a participle wants to attach itself to a thing or a person -- or a subject if you prefer. If we continue down the sentence, we discover that the first eligible candidate is the word it.  But the it is not the thing that is rushing and dodging. I am. In other words, the participles  rushing and dodging  were  looking for a person, but the writer has supplied us with a thing, an  it, instead.

To correct this sentence, we need to get rid of the word it and replace it with a person (I, he, Peter....) who is actually capable of rushing and dodging: 

Rushing through the hissing rain and dodging the slow-moving people on the sidewalks  with their stupid oversized umbrellas that symbolize the Romans'  complete lack of respect for others, especially for others who might conceivably be in a hurry, I/Peter/Mary/she/he decided that this city was one of the worst places in the world to get  caught in a downpour.

Rushing and dodging now attach themselves to Peter, Mary, he, she or  I and the sentence reads better.

Was it incomprehensible before? No. But it is definitely  better in the second version.



Here are some more:

After inspecting the guard of honor, the President's motorcade moved into the center of the city. (Wait, who inspected the guard of honor: the motorcade or the President?)

Lifting the child in my arms, the safest place seemed to be the high ground above the water (Is the place lifting the child?)

By standing on his head and reciting "God Save the Queen" backwards, his hiccups were cured (The hiccups stood on his head?)

From reading these blog posts, the grammar became suddenly clear (So the grammar is doing the reading?)

Being unique, I don't think I will ever be able to emulate the accomplishments of Nelson Mandela (I seem to be calling myself rather than Mandela or his accomplishments unique)

When coming back to my apartment the other day, the rain was coming down by the bucketful (The rain lives in your apartment?)

Having boogied the night away, my soft bed was a welcome sight (If you think your  bed was dancing all night long, you probably do need a long rest)

Having cared for the elderly and looked after stray kittens and other small creatures all her life, her sudden decision to join the Nazis came as a bit of a shock (Her decision did not care for the elderly, she did).

(2)

The grammarians admit defeat.

The rule of the dangling participle can be overdone. Sometimes it's ok to break it. 

Consider this: 

Speaking of food, did you remember to bring the sandwiches? 

Technically, this is wrong, because  it is not the "you" who is speaking of food. The phrase means On the subject of food...

But it would take a real curmudgeonly bore to insist upon this point. Certain phrases like the one above are perfectly acceptable. 

As are these: 

Concerning the question of circus animals, I am all for elephant rides, but draw the line at lion-taming. 

Barring any more mishaps, the show should go ahead as planned.

Considering his attitude, you were justified in attacking him.

Judging by the look on your face, you are not as happy with your fish as I am. 

Regarding your application to become a shepherd, you should know that your present legal status of wolf  may be a problem.

Here is one with a past participle (based).

Based on the results so far, I can say that the trend is encouraging.

Well, that's perfectly comprehensible, isn't it? Yes, it is, and I  would not mark that up as an error. Even so, what the sentence is effectively  saying is that I am based "on the results so far". But I am not based on the results:  I am based in Monteverde, a district in Rome.

So what to do with it? How about: "Given the results so far, I can say..."? That is a bit  better because it is true that I have been "given" the results.  To get out of the bind, you could write something like, "The results so far indicate that...". (Or you could just leave it - yeah, leave it).

None of the examples in this second section needs correction, even though, arguably, each contains a dangling participle.

Grammarians, unable to stem the flood of careless use,  have reclassified some of them (such as considering, regarding, concerning, barring, following, owing to, based on, excluding) from participles to prepositions, and then, to cover their retreat, given them a fancy name ("deverbal prepositions"). Basically, they just moved the goalposts.

Grammarians and teachers are often not to be trusted.