“Unattached” Clauses in Technical Writing

Michael P. Jordan Queen's University

Abstract

The views concerning “dangling participles” of grammarians, usage experts and authors of books on technical writing are reviewed and compared. Although many unattached clauses are clearly unacceptable, some are less objectionable and still others are acceptable practice. Absolute constructions and other clause-relational participial, infinitival and verbless clauses need no attachment to a proximate noun or noun phrase, and logical clauses that are not attached to a noun are shown as normal, acceptable use. Even clearly adjectival clauses are often unattached when followed by the passive voice, intransitives and several other grammatical structures; clauses between the subject and verb and at the end of the sentence are also often not attached to the immediately preceding noun. Cultural (perhaps also gender) differences between humanistic teachers and task-oriented engineers are noted as possible causes of different viewpoints regarding the use of unattached participles, and greater acceptance of the many acceptable forms of unattached clauses is argued.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
1999-01-01
DOI
10.2190/41pb-wpvv-0vxy-jm1q
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Technical Communication Quarterly

Cites in this index (4)

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. College Composition and Communication
Also cites 5 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1075/pbns.16.08jor
  2. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
  3. 10.17763/haer.53.2.h08w5m7v217j84t1
  4. 10.1075/cilt.158.07jor
  5. 10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00086-6
CrossRef global citation count: 3 View in citation network →