Do these two sentences contain misplace and dangling modifiers are there correct.
1.Louise projected the photographs on a large screen that she had taken at the zoo.
2. There is a bracelet at the musuem that is four thousand years old.
1. "at the zoo" describes where the photos were taken, NOT where they were shown, or where the screen was stolen. The modifier is misplaced.
2. I would say this is OK, because it is obvious the museum is not four thousand years old. The reader will assume that the age applies to the bracelet. However, strictly speaking, it should be:
"There is a bracelet that is four thousand years old at the musuem."
or
There is a four-thousand-year-old bracelet at the museum"
I'll disagree this time!!
1.Louise projected the photographs on a large screen that she had taken at the zoo.
Was the large screen something "that she had taken at the zoo"? Where can you move "that...zoo" so that it makes sense?
2. DrWlS is right -- best correction is to move "that is four thousand years old" so it's right next to whatever it's describing, in this case "bracelet."
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/modifiers.htm#misplaced
hshsh
To determine if the two sentences contain misplaced or dangling modifiers, we need to analyze each sentence individually.
1. "Louise projected the photographs on a large screen that she had taken at the zoo."
In this sentence, there is no misplaced or dangling modifier. The modifiers "that she had taken at the zoo" appropriately describe the photographs, indicating that Louise took them at the zoo.
2. "There is a bracelet at the museum that is four thousand years old."
Similarly, in this sentence, there are no misplaced or dangling modifiers. The modifier "that is four thousand years old" modifies the noun "bracelet," providing essential information about its age.
In both sentences, the modifiers are correctly placed and appropriately modify the intended noun or noun phrase. Thus, there are no misplaced or dangling modifiers in these sentences.