Word Order is Important for Modifiers

I’ve mentioned “only” several times in the past (go use the search box to the right). Putting an adverb at the end of a sentence can make the adverb’s antecedent tricky to chose.

“Tired of taking things seriously” does not mean the same thing as “seriously tired of taking things.” I recommend you put your midifiers as close as you can to what they modify.

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

I usually pontificate about “only” being too far from what it refers to (Look up “only” in the search box on the upper right). But here’s an example with “just.” Always put these words right next to what they refer to.

In case you don’t get the joke, she’s not talking about getting her hair done, but about how recently the hair was done, and she wants the hairdo to last longer than a week.

See? Word order makes a difference.

This is an example of a misplaced modifier. Modifiers should go as close to what they modify as you can put them.

The leaves are not for parties and weddings, the confetti is for parties and weddings, so “for parties and weddings” should come right after “confetti.” Okay, maybe this is a really minor solecism, but hey, I’m a curmudgeon. Harrumpf!

English is mostly uninflected (it doesn’t have many word endings) so word order makes a difference. Here’s a good example; first two panels:

Greek, for example, is heavily inflected, so word order doesn’t matter so much. The endings tell what words connect to each other. In fact they have a literary technique called chiasmus where the first half of a sentence has the parts of speech in the exact opposite order as the second half. You can’t do that in English. I don’t think. Try to do it and submit your suggestion in the comments.

A rule in English is to put modifiers as close to what they modify as you can. Adjectives generally go directly before the noun they modify, a blue car, for example. (Except for post-positives such as “malice aforethought.”)

Adjectival phrases can go afterwards, but what do you do when you have more than one of those phrases? You put the phrase as close as you can to the thing it modifies. Here’s a guy who didn’t:

Decades ago, psychologist Benjamin Libet monitored subjects’ neural activity while they chose to hit a button, and he discovered a burst of activity preceding the conscious decision to push the button by a split second.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/my-go-to-arguments-for-free-will

What does that split second refer to? It refers to the burst of activity, not pushing the button! He didn’t need so many big words, either. How about this:

… he discovered a burst of activity a split second before the decision to push the button.

Well, I think the sentence is easier to follow now.

This sort of thing is part of good writing. No clear-cut rule, just good judgement.

• When you write, think how you might be misunderstood, and don’t do that.
• Try not to cause bumps for your reader.