So, I was scrolling through my facebook news feed when I came across a status someone had put up that read "I get road rage walking behind people." .

Now, the "walking behind people" part modifies the "I" if i'm not wrong. So, wouldn't there be a comma following the word rage?

  • Care to elaborate on what you mean by wouldn't? – Tᴚoɯɐuo Jun 8 '16 at 12:06
  • @TRomano - I think the poster just means "Shouldn't there be a comma...?" – stangdon Jun 8 '16 at 12:08
  • @stangdon: Wouldn't the Facebook copy editors have prevented such an error? – Tᴚoɯɐuo Jun 8 '16 at 12:09
  • I think it is absurd to be discussing punctuation on a Facebook news feed. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Jun 8 '16 at 12:10
  • 3
    In my opinion the original sentence is fine without a comma. (Facebook copy editors? I can't tell if @TRomano is joking.) – nnnnnn Jun 8 '16 at 12:14

That post technically contains a misplaced modifier so punctuation is not really relevant. In that sentence, walking behind people functions as an adjective and modifies I. Therefore, it should be placed closer to I to clarify that it modifies I.

As written, walking behind people technically is describing rage. Note that it does not make sense to describe rage as walking so English speakers will assume walking behind people modifies I and not misunderstand the meaning. However, consider the following sentence:

I saw a girl walking down the street.

In this sentence, both girl and I can potentially be walking so you have to rely on grammar rather than the meaning of the words to figure out who is walking. Girl is being modified because is it closer to walking down the street.

If you wanted to clarify that I was walking, you have to invert the word order:

Walking down the street, I saw a girl.

So in proper English, the post above should be written:

Walking behind people, I get road rage.

Now just as a final note, the sentence I wrote above is completely correct and the one in the post is not. However, the correct sentence differs from the incorrect one in that it emphasizes walking behind people. The incorrect one is more of a simple statement with walking behind people thrown in as an afterthought.

| improve this answer | |
  • In my opinion the original sentence has a vibe that complements the writer's meaning. – nnnnnn Jun 8 '16 at 13:05
  • You guys are brutal. Is something in this answer not correct? – G-Cam Jun 8 '16 at 13:22
  • 1
    Well I didn't down-vote, but I don't agree with your conclusion. In my opinion the original sentence emphasises that the (metaphorical) road rage happens while walking behind people - I don't think that comes across as an afterthought. – nnnnnn Jun 8 '16 at 15:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.