How do I clarify a sentence when it is unclear who an action refers to?

Look for an action whose actor is missing, far away, or easy to confuse with another person or group. A useful test is to ask, “Who did this?” after each action in the sentence. If the answer could reasonably be two different people—or you have to guess from surrounding context—name the actor or reshape the sentence.

For example:

• Unclear: “After speaking with Jordan, the schedule was changed.”
• Clearer, if Jordan changed it: “After speaking with Jordan, I changed the schedule.”
• Clearer, if the writer does not know who changed it: “After the conversation with Jordan, someone changed the schedule.”

The last version is clear about what is unknown; it does not pretend to know who acted.

Replace the pronoun with the intended person’s name, role, or group. Keep the pronoun only if a reader can identify its referent without having to reread.

For instance:

• Unclear: “Mina told Lee that she should send the revised draft.”
• If Mina should send it: “Mina told Lee that Mina should send the revised draft.”
• If Lee should send it: “Mina told Lee to send the revised draft.”

Choose wording that matches what was meant. The original sentence alone does not tell us which person should send the draft, so the writer must decide rather than let the edit make that decision.

Move the actor closer to the action, or divide the sentence so the relationship is easier to follow. Be careful with long openings and clauses that introduce another person or group in between.

Example:

• Hard to follow: “The committee, after reviewing the comments from staff and speaking with the venue coordinator, decided to move the meeting.”
• Easier to track: “The committee reviewed staff comments and spoke with the venue coordinator. It then decided to move the meeting.”

Here, “it” refers to the committee because the second sentence gives it a clear subject. If a sentence names several possible groups, repeating the name may be clearer than using a pronoun.

Not always. Passive wording can keep the focus on the request or decision, and the actor may be unknown or unimportant. But if readers need to know who approved it, name that person or group. Don’t add an actor just to make the sentence more direct.

Compare:

• Actor matters: “The project lead approved the request.”
• Decision is the focus; actor is not given: “The request was approved.”
• Actor is unknown: “The request was approved, but the available notes do not name the approver.”

That final phrasing makes the limit clear instead of guessing. Keep the original emphasis where it matters, while making responsibility visible when the reader needs it.

Try this four-step edit:

1. Mark each action: changed, approved, sent, decided.
2. Ask who performed each action. If you cannot tell from what you know, leave the actor unspecified rather than inventing one.
3. Check every pronoun for one clear referent. Replace it with a name or role if there are competing possibilities.
4. Read the revision once for meaning and once for emphasis: did it clarify responsibility without changing who acted or what the sentence foregrounds?

Worked example:

• Draft: “When the notes were reviewed by the coordinator and Pat, they were sent to the group.”
• If the coordinator sent them: “The coordinator reviewed the notes with Pat, then sent them to the group.”
• If both sent them: “The coordinator and Pat reviewed the notes, then sent them to the group.”
• If the sender is not known: “The coordinator and Pat reviewed the notes. The notes were then sent to the group.”

These revisions depend on different intended meanings. Pick the one that reflects what happened; if you do not know who sent the notes, don’t imply that you do.