“He left town in early spring, some people think to avoid prosecution.”

When I first read that sentence (by a very good writer, in a respected magazine), I thought someone had neglected to put in a second comma, after think. But when I looped back for a second reading, I saw that it was correct—and clear —as written. He did in fact leave town, and some people think his motive was to avoid prosecution.

So is it okay as is? Or should the writer or editor have changed something? It depends on how many people would stub their eyes on it during first reading. I don’t know the answer to that.

But I know that I did, so I’d vote for a change in syntax (arrangement of words in the sentence), which might also mean a tweaking of the punctuation. Maybe some minor emendation like “He left town in early spring (to avoid prosecution, some people think).”

It’s a tough job for the writer (who already knows what is meant) to detect such little problems ahead of time. And it’s often even harder for an overworked editor, who would first have to notice the problem, then decide that it’s important enough to deserve fixing, then decide the best way to revise it, and then either make the change or convince the writer to do it (or at least to agree to it).

As with lots of writing questions, there is no easy answer. But if we can be alert and sensitive to such possible snags, we can avoid many of them in our first drafts, or change them during the revision process. And sooner is better.