To begin with, this sentence is not a fragment. It does, however, contain a dangling modifier, which is the mistake I think the book is referring to. A dangling modifier modifies a word whose identity is not made clear in the sentence.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
umaa.spkThanks. But can you explain me how to find these kind of dangling modifiers? Am I sound absurd? But when I read the sentence at the first time, I didn't find it difficult to understand.
What if you read WHO HAD BEEN WAITING FOR A RIDE in the same flow. Doesn't it sound ride? This total relative phrase refers PEOPLE. This is what I understood.
umaa.spkThe driver trook the people who had been waiting for a ride. - Do you find anything wrong in it?Umaa:
But the explanation in the book says, it is wrong. FOR A RIDE refers PEOPLE. But even if FOR A RIDE refers PEOPLE, it is not sentence fragment. The sentence means something right?