So what is the approved position of the word only? I quote Glenn:
Of course, there is some wiggle room when discussing measurable mass amounts, as opposed to countable objects:
"There's three pounds of butter in that dessert, and it only serves 6!"
Glenn is a the most reliable source I know for good English. But, for a bit of criticism, the word only in that sentence qualifies "serves", which is not the intention. Only should be attached to "6", correct? I ask only because only has been so splayed.
I admit that "… serves only 6" is clearer. Can I chalk it up to my reproducing a bit of dialog? Would you like to buy a bridge?
I often remark hearing "only" misplaced, and chuckle from time to time at some unintended implication. What? You think the dessert should seat 6 as well?
The same sort of thing happens with "... both ... and ..." "... either ... or ..." "... neither ... (n)or ..."
e.g. "Either he didn't proofread or is a non-native speaker." is better when the "either" is moved to "He either didn't proofread or is a non-native speaker." or the subject "he" is repeated as "Either he didn't proofread or he is a non-native speaker."
In conversation, I mangle these all the time. In more formal writing, I try to edit them out.
Glenn said:
. . . Would you like to buy a bridge?
Does it lead to Brooklyn? Because I'm in if it does.
The comment about your use of only really was quite nitpicking, and I certainly knew what you meant. I, too, am very guilty of misplacing it in conversation, though I'm more careful in formal writing and editing. But I wonder what it says that two people who be aware of the meanings that can change with misplacement of only allow for misplacement in everyday speech. I guess one has to pick one's battles.
(And, by the way, I pledge not to edit you going forward, Glenn. I had just been thinking about the problems with misplacing that word when I read your post. Keep up your good work.)