0
Paco2004 Posted 22 years ago
Grammar
Dangling particple/gerund
Hi everyone
This time I'd like to ask about dangling participle or gerund. Please look the example sentences as follows;
1. They detected the agent using a new method.
2. The agent was detected using a new method.
3. Using a new method, the agent was detected.
4. They detected the agent by using a new method.
5. The agent was detected by using a new method.
6. By using a new method, the agent was detected.
I know or feel that #2 and #3 are dangling participles but I don't feel 'danglingness' in #6 and above all in #5. I feel the phrase 'by using something' by itself as an idiomatic gerundive phrase and it is out of the control of the subject (=the agent). Am I wrong? Any comments are welcome.
paco
This time I'd like to ask about dangling participle or gerund. Please look the example sentences as follows;
1. They detected the agent using a new method.
2. The agent was detected using a new method.
3. Using a new method, the agent was detected.
4. They detected the agent by using a new method.
5. The agent was detected by using a new method.
6. By using a new method, the agent was detected.
I know or feel that #2 and #3 are dangling participles but I don't feel 'danglingness' in #6 and above all in #5. I feel the phrase 'by using something' by itself as an idiomatic gerundive phrase and it is out of the control of the subject (=the agent). Am I wrong? Any comments are welcome.
paco
Top answer
By using "by using", I believe you are absolved from any dangling in 4, 5, and 6! 1, 2, and 3 are all ambiguous because of the dangling structure. The first is the worst offender because both "they", the detectors, and "the agent" are both mentioned in the sentence and we don't know exactly to whom to ascribe the use of the new method.
- By using "by using", I believe you are absolved from any dangling in 4, 5, and 6!
- 1, 2, and 3 are all ambiguous because of the dangling structure.
- The first is the worst offender because both "they", the detectors, and "the agent" are both mentioned in the sentence and we don't know exactly to whom to ascribe the use of the new method.
- CJ
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
12 Answers
0
By using "by using", I believe you are absolved from any dangling in 4, 5, and 6!
1, 2, and 3 are all ambiguous because of the dangling structure. The first is the worst offender because both "they", the detectors, and "the agent" are both mentioned in the sentence and we don't know exactly to whom to ascribe the use of the new method.
CJ
1, 2, and 3 are all ambiguous because of the dangling structure. The first is the worst offender because both "they", the detectors, and "the agent" are both mentioned in the sentence and we don't know exactly to whom to ascribe the use of the new method.
CJ
00
Hello CJ
Thank you for the quick reply. Your objection to #1 sentence surprised me. I myself long believed there would be no problem in the sentence. By the way do you think we can be absolved from danglingness by using "by -ing" in general? How about the following sentence, for example?
Tickets can be purchased by calling Ticketmaster at 361-3100.
paco
Thank you for the quick reply. Your objection to #1 sentence surprised me. I myself long believed there would be no problem in the sentence. By the way do you think we can be absolved from danglingness by using "by -ing" in general? How about the following sentence, for example?
Tickets can be purchased by calling Ticketmaster at 361-3100.
paco
00
The construct "by -ing" goes a long way toward blocking the undesired reading in these potentially dangling cases, but probably not in general.
Even with the "by", this one bothers me, for example:
By looking through this high-powered microscope, the butterfly seemed even more beautiful.
Comparing with the same sentence without the "by", you see, however, that the "
Even with the "by", this one bothers me, for example:
By looking through this high-powered microscope, the butterfly seemed even more beautiful.
Comparing with the same sentence without the "by", you see, however, that the "
00
Hello CJ
I too feel some oddness in this sentence. I think the tolerance toward danglingness differs from a person to a person. Some native speakers say it's a dangling but other native speakers say it's OK. This brings us into confusion.
paco
By looking through this high-powered microscope, the butterfly seemed even more beautiful.
I too feel some oddness in this sentence. I think the tolerance toward danglingness differs from a person to a person. Some native speakers say it's a dangling but other native speakers say it's OK. This brings us into confusion.
paco
00
The idiom is "from person to person", Paco! 
To make the example worse:
The butterfly seemed even more beautiful w
To make the example worse:
The butterfly seemed even more beautiful w
00
CJ
'From person to person' ...ahaha I made a mistake! Thank you for the correction.
paco
'From person to person' ...ahaha I made a mistake! Thank you for the correction.
We saw a man on a hill with a telescope.Yes this sentence is really ambiguous. We can't fix the exact sense without knowing the context.
paco
00
It's cheering to see this discussed. Most native speakers are blithely unaware of their dangliness.
It occurs to me that if participle usage had evolved slightly differently, to allow passive participles in such cases, all would have been well, e.g.
'Having bought an apple tree at the show last week, the only problem now is where to plant it.'
would become:
It occurs to me that if participle usage had evolved slightly differently, to allow passive participles in such cases, all would have been well, e.g.
'Having bought an apple tree at the show last week, the only problem now is where to plant it.'
would become:
00
Hello Mr P
Thank you for the comment. How about if we add 'after' before the -ing sentence?
paco
Thank you for the comment. How about if we add 'after' before the -ing sentence?
After (my) having bought an apple tree, the only problem now is where to plant it.Couldn't we be absolved from danglingness even in the presence of the preposition 'after'?
paco
00
Hello Paco san
I fear we would then have a dangling lacuna:
1. 'Now' = the time of the problem, which is 'after':
2. {the void}, i.e. the time which is after the buying, but before the 'after'.
3. The buying of the apple tree.
We might close the gap by saying 'after my buying an apple tree', but then the clause would seem to require a verb to qualify; where
I fear we would then have a dangling lacuna:
1. 'Now' = the time of the problem, which is 'after':
2. {the void}, i.e. the time which is after the buying, but before the 'after'.
3. The buying of the apple tree.
We might close the gap by saying 'after my buying an apple tree', but then the clause would seem to require a verb to qualify; where
00
This is getting uncomfortably close to the old Wittgensteinian maxim: "Whereof one cannot speak one must remain silent"!
0
Related Questions