3 min
Let’s Make This Clear: Ambiguous Pronouns and How to Fix Them
Let’s Make This Clear: Ambiguous Pronouns and How to Fix Them
Clarity is a hallmark of good writing. Sometimes advice on improving clarity and grammar tends towards being too strict and limiting. For example, you may have encountered the overzealous recommendation that this should never be used without a modifying noun to avoid ambiguity or broad reference—that is, the use of an entire clause or sentence as an antecedent. It’s commonly used when writers need to refer to complex ideas or clauses, as in academic writing. This article weighs in on this assertion to show you when broad reference is acceptable and, when not, how to reword a sentence to remove it.
Pronouns usually refer to an antecedent noun or noun phrase. In broad reference, a pronoun (this, that, which or it) assumes the function of an entire clause or sentence:
I used to constantly misplace my dictionary. This is why I use Antidote now.
This refers to the antecedent I used to constantly misplace my dictionary. The two sentences can be rephrased as I used to constantly misplace my dictionary, but I use Antidote now.
With a simple antecedent sentence, as in the example above, the application of broad reference is often clear and unobjectionable. There are legitimate stylistic reasons (emphasis, temporal transition, etc.) for choosing this structure over another.
But pronouns can be ambiguous, and broad reference worsens the issue because it opens the door to even more potential target antecedents for a pronoun. Despite criticism of broad reference, it is not necessary to eliminate it from your writing to avoid ambiguity. The following examples of broad reference are intended to help you identify when it leads to ambiguity, and to show techniques that rectify these ambiguous structures.
Ambiguous Pronouns: Examples
Broad reference is especially prone to ambiguity following sentences with complex syntactic structures such as subordination, coordination and other embedded clauses (i.e. clauses that contain clauses). It is their inherent grammatical complexity—having multiple clauses and phrases—that introduces multiple targets as potential antecedents.
Case 1: Subordination
If you leave late, you can sign out at the security desk. This is acceptable to management.
In this example, this could refer to the independent clause (you can sign out at the security desk), the dependent clause (you leave late), or the entire sentence. One way to resolve the ambiguity is by changing the verb in the antecedent clause to a gerund. This way, we can rewrite the sentence to cover each possibility:
If you leave late, signing out at the security desk is acceptable to management.
Leaving late is acceptable to management. You can sign out at the security desk.
Leaving late by signing out at the security desk is acceptable to management.
Case 2: Coordination
Some teachers follow a fixed curriculum with consistent instructions, yet others adapt their assignments to students’ interests. This can cause confusion for learners.
Here, this may replace one of the coordinated elements, any combination of them, or the whole sentence. Another way to clarify the antecedent is to convert the broad reference and its antecedent into a subordinate clause.
Here are a few rewritten sentences that use this method:
That some teachers follow a fixed curriculum with consistent instructions, yet others adapt their assignments to students’ interests can cause confusion for learners.
Some teachers adapt their assignments to students’ interests. Learners can become confused because other teachers follow a fixed curriculum with consistent instructions.
Case 3: Embedding
We would replicate the experiment across multiple ecological sites to enhance generalizability; however, we think this could prove impractical.
The pronoun this might refer to the replication of the experiments or the enhanced generalizability. We can replace the pronoun of broad reference with a noun that summarizes the idea that we want to target.
[...] However, we think this replication could prove impractical.
[...] However, we think this generalization could prove impractical.
Techniques for Clarity
In the previous examples of broad reference, we shared these methods of resolving ambiguity:
- changing the verb in the antecedent clause to a gerund,
- converting the broad reference and its antecedent into a subordinate clause, and
- replacing the pronoun with a noun that summarizes the target antecedent.
One thing to note is that prior knowledge and subsequent context can serve to resolve ambiguity. However, relying on knowledge and context is not advised (although not forbidden) as this may increase a reader’s cognitive load and hamper comprehension.
Disambiguating Writing
Writing out complex ideas can lead us unwittingly into all sorts of grammatical and stylistic flubs. For another discussion on avoiding ambiguous phrases, see our article Mislaid Modifiers. Thinking about broad reference may make a conscientious writer worry. But some training in spotting ambiguity can empower us as writers and allow us to apply broad reference with confidence or eliminate it on our terms.
More examples:
He lost his ability to speak, but gained extraordinary artistic skills, which demonstrates the incredible plasticity of the human brain.
- His losing the ability to speak yet gaining extraordinary artistic skills demonstrates the incredible plasticity of the human brain.
Many studies claim that human language is unique and that studying animal communication offers no insight into humans. That is why I have not explored animal studies.
- Many studies claim that human language is unique. Therefore, I have not explored animal communication studies because they offer no insight into humans.
Some sports competitions have both open and women’s events, often held concurrently. It allows women to participate at an international level.
- [...] This flexibility allows women to participate at an international level.
