How misused modifiers can hurt your writing - Emma Bryce

譯者: Ming Gui Tan 審譯者: Max Chern

This just in:

最新消息：

"Thief robs town with world's largest chocolate bunny."

『小偷洗劫有世上最大的巧克力兔子的城鎮 （小偷利用世上最大的巧克力兔子 洗劫城鎮）』

Wait, so are we talking about this,

等等，我們到底在說這個呢，

or this?

還是這個？

That's a classic case of a misplaced modifier,

這是"誤置修飾語" 的經典例子，

a common grammatical mistake

一種常見的文法謬誤

that can dramatically change the meaning of a sentence.

足以大幅改變句子的意思

And lest you think this is a bit far-fetched,

為避免你覺得 我的舉例太扯了

confusing headlines like this appear all the time.

看！像這樣語意不清 的新聞標題，無處不在

Modifiers are words, phrases, and clauses

修飾語是字、片語以及從句

that add information about other parts of a sentence,

用來註解句子裡部分的內容，

which is usually helpful.

通常都很有用。

But when modifiers aren't linked clearly enough

但是當修飾語沒有適當明了

to the words they're actually referring to,

指出所要註解的內容，

they can create unintentional ambiguity.

就會無意中 造成語義含糊不清。

That happens because the modifying words,

會發生這樣的事 是因為這些修飾語，

in this case, "with world's largest chocolate bunny,"

比如此例， 『有世上最大的巧克力兔子』

modify the wrong thing, the robber's actions instead of the town.

錯誤地修飾了 小偷的行為，而不是城鎮。

To correct this particular sentence, we simply rephrase

要糾正這句話， 我們只要句子重組

to make it clearer what the modifying phrase is talking about.

來更明了的指出修飾語 想要修飾的內容。

"Town with world's largest chocolate bunny robbed by thief."

『擁有世上最大巧克力兔子的城鎮 被小偷洗劫』

Now, at least it's clear

現在至少清楚知道

that the thief wasn't armed with a giant chocolate animal.

小偷並沒有利用 那巧克力巨兔作武器。

Sometimes, modifying words, phrases, or clauses

有時呢，修飾語的字 片語或子句

don't appear to be modifying anything at all.

好像沒有在修飾任何東西。

That's called a dangling modifier.

這我們稱作“垂懸修飾語”。

"Having robbed the bank in record time,

『疾速地打劫銀行之後，

it was possible to make off with the town's chocolate rabbit as well."

一併偷走鎮上的巧克力兔子是有可能的』

The modifying phrase in this sentence seems unrelated to anything else,

這句子裡的修飾語 看起來沒有跟任何內容掛得上鉤，

and so we're clueless about

所以，我們根本不知道

who the chocolate-loving criminal could possibly be.

那位喜歡巧克力的小偷到底是誰。

Giving the modifier something to modify will solve the problem.

讓修飾語有內容可以修飾 （“小偷”決定一併...） 這問題自然迎刃而解。

Then there's another group called the squinting modifiers

然後還有一組叫做 歧義（瞇眼）修飾語

because they're stuck between two things and could feasibly refer to either.

因為他們夾在兩個 都可能被修飾的句子當中。

Often, these modifiers are adverbs, like the one in this sentence:

這些修飾語通常是副詞， 像這句子裡的：

"Robbers who steal chocolate bunnies rapidly attract the outrage of onlookers."

『偷巧克力兔子的強盜快速地引起公憤』 （快速偷巧克力的強盜引起公憤）

"Rapidly" is the modifier, here, but what's not clear

『快速地』是句子裡的修飾語， 但不清楚的是

is whether it's referring to the speed of the chocolate thievery,

到底它是指 偷巧克力的速度呢，

or how quickly it alerts the furious onlookers.

還是引起公憤的速度。

To clarify, we can either put the modifier closer to its intended phrase,

為了釐清，可以將修飾語 靠進欲修飾的詞句，

which works in some cases,

這在某些狀況行得通；

or we can entirely reword the sentence so that the modifier no longer squints,

或者直接重組句子 讓修飾語不再有歧義

but clearly applies to only one part.

而是，很明確地 只修飾句子其中的一部份

"Chocolate bunny-thieving robbers rapidly attract the outrage of onlookers."

『巧克力兔賊快速的引起公憤』

Justice will eventually come to the chocolate thief,

正義自然會將巧克力賊 繩之於法

but in the meantime,

但於此同時，

our task is to avoid verbal ambiguity

我們的任務是

by making it clear which parts of the sentences modifiers belong to.

釐清修飾語修飾的對象 避免語意含糊不清

That way, we can at least maintain grammatical law and order.

這樣，我們至少能夠維護 語法的正義。