Hi I'm a Japanese who is learning English. I'm now confused with "dangling gerunds".
Many grammar books say that a gerund phrase 'by using' like that in the sentence as follows is a dangling modifier;
(1) By using computers, this process can be easily controlled.
I know, however, many scientists are using 'by using something' in passive sentences in the way like.
(2) This process can be easily controlled by using computers.
What I do like to ask you (native English speakers) is whether you feel some difference about the degree of 'danglingess' between the two 'by using compuers'. Any comments are wecome.
The two statements are the same to me
The main clause of each sentence is "this process can be easily controlled" it's passive in both cases. The only difference is where you put the "by using computers". Dangling it at the end is no better nor any worse than dangling it at the beginning. "The two statements are the same ..." as Tiffany writes.
Tifanny and Jim,
Thank you a lot for the quick replies. So you feel the both 'by using computers' are danglers in the same degree. Huum.... I'm wondering why many people use 'by using something' in passive sentences especially at their end despite many grammar books say it is a dangling modifier.
Anyway your comments are very helpful. Thank you again.
saya
Your grammar books have some truth to them. You
sometimes cannot move the 'by' phrase to the beginning.
Consider:
By piranhas, the cats and dogs seem to have been eaten. (no good)
The cats and dogs seem to have been eaten by piranhas. (good)
But other times you can move the 'by' phrase. For example:
By using the ladder, you can climb onto the roof.
You can climb onto the roof by using the ladder.
Both of these sentences sound fine (but the second sounds better).
Yeah, but, D, notice how there's no gerund in "The cats and dogs seem to have been eaten by piranhas." You're right that "By piranhas, the cats and dogs seem to have been eaten." doesn't have a good ring to it though.
Then, on the other hand, if your "by using ..." phrase is quite long it might be best to put it at the end.
(5) This beer is brewed from quality ingredients by using our pure brewer's yeast and our advanced brewing techniques.
(6) By using our pure brewer's yeast and our advanced brewing techniques, this beer is brewed from quality ingredients.
(6) is still grammatically correct but it sounds just a little awkward ... actually what I should say is that it sounds just a little more awkward than (5). (6) it sounds quite awkward but this is because (5) sounds very awkward.
My point is that if you move a long "by using ..." phrase you introduce a little awkwardness: the longer the phrase, the greater the awkwardness.
Okay, let's fix (5) up:
(5*) This beer is brewed from quality ingredients with our pure brewer's yeast by using our advanced brewing techniques.
There, that's much better. Now let's rearrange things.
(6*) By using our advanced brewing techniques, this beer is brewed from quality ingredients with our pure brewer's yeast.
It's still a long "by using ..." phrase so (6*) is still somewhat more awkward than (5*). They are still awkward sounding sentences, though. They've used "our" twice. It would be better to omit one or both. They've used "brewed", "brewer's" and "brewing" in the same sentence: this is just too much. "Brewer's yeast" and "brewing techniques" ... what other kinds would you use? Why do they mention the yeast seperately when they've already mentioned ingredients? Yeast is an ingredient. Of course the beer company will be worrying now because I've cut out too many words so the sentence doesn't take up enough room on the can. They could alway write bigger ... or how about adding "high" in front of "quality"?
(5+) This beer is brewed from pure yeast and other high quality ingredients by using advanced techniques.
(6+) By using advanced techniques, this beer is brewed from pure yeast and other high quality ingredients.
Now we've got a nice short "by using ..." phrase and moving it to the beginning actually makes the sentence sound better.
Actually, I'd prefer the sound of all of these "by using" sentences if there were no "by" at all.
(1A) Using computers, this process can be easily controlled.
(2A) This process can be easily controlled using computers.
(3A) Using the ladder, you can climb onto the roof.
(4A) You can climb onto the roof using the ladder.
(5A) This beer is brewed from quality ingredients using our pure brewer's yeast and our advanced brewing techniques.
(6A) Using our pure brewer's yeast and our advanced brewing techniques, this beer is brewed from quality ingredients.
(5*A) This beer is brewed from quality ingredients with our pure brewer's yeast using our advanced brewing techniques.
(6*A) Using our advanced brewing techniques, this beer is brewed from quality ingredients with our pure brewer's yeast.
(5+A) This beer is brewed from pure yeast and other high quality ingredients using advanced techniques.
(6+A) Using advanced techniques, this beer is brewed from pure yeast and other high quality ingredients.
I wonder whether anyone from the beer company in question (they know who they are) will ever visit this page.
D and Jim, Thank you all for your comments.
Yes, as D suggested I tend to get confused with the two kinds of by-phrases. We have to make different 'by an agent' in passive sentences from the simple adverbial 'by phrase' to mean a means.
By the way I have another question.
(1) They used the new method to detect the agent.
　　　<passive> (1') The new method was used to detect the agent. <Good>
(2) They detected the agent by using the new method.
　　　<passive> (2') The agent was detected by using the new method. <Bad>
Why do you think the subject of the infinitive 'to detect' in (1') is not 'the new method' but 'they' ?
Why don't think the subject of the gerund 'using' in (2') is 'the new method' but not 'they'?
I can't understand the logic or rule(s) you have in finding the subject of an infinitive or a gerund.
saya
>(1) They used the new method to detect the agent.
>Why do you think the subject of the infinitive 'to detect' in (1')
I don't. There is no subject of this infinitive. The whole infinitive
phrase "to detect the detective" modifies the main phrase
"They used a new method." The same thing happens in all
of the sentences above -- there is a clause with no subject.
This happens in a different way in some other sentences, such as:
He likes to go to the store.
In that sentence, "to go to the store" has no subject. But in
(*) the infinitive phrase is an object, whereas in (1) the infinitive
phrase modifies the verb 'used'.
Thank you D.
(1) <active> They used the new method to detect the agent.
(1') <passive> The new method was used to detect the agent. <Good>
(2) <active> They detected the agent by using the new method.
(2') <passive> The agent was detected by using the new method. <Bad>
I understand　that the infinitive "to detect the agent" modifies "they used the new method" in the active sentence of (1) and it modifies " the new method was used". However suppose you are asked who detected, you will answer that the doer of <detecting> is "they" for the both, although "by them" is not explicitly written in the passive. Similarly we can easily know the doer of <using> in the both active and passive of (2) is also "they". Despite this, English grammar books say that (1') is good but that (2') is bad. I'm wondering why the books say so.
saya