请教：分析一个句子，单从语法考虑，能看出定语定谁来吗？

例句：
....the  shaping device is placed behind a part of the first and second object pieces, heated by the heating  device, in the X direction.
heated by the heating device 限制的是 the first and second object pieces还是 a part，不结合具体技术方案，单从语法分析是哪个？
谢谢啦！知道的回一声哦。:-)

我可以很负责任地告诉你，不能。

\"heated by...\"这个结构本身在语法上属于所谓的“虚悬分词”（dangling participle)，即找不到明确逻辑主语的分词结构。

即使在英美人看来，dangling participle也是很容易引起误解和歧义的，正如下面这篇文章所言“In academic writing, dangling participles can cause serious misunderstandings”

http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/WritingGuide/10dangpt.htm

专业知识在正确翻译中的必不可少性可见一斑。

可否理解为
The shaping device is placed behind a part of the first and second object pieces, (and) is heated by the heating device, in the X direction.
即理解为主语相同、省略了第二句子中的主语及俩个句子之间的连词and。

....the shaping device is placed behind a part of the first and second object pieces, heated by the heating device, in the X direction.

由heated前面的逗号可以判断是修饰a part，逗号隔开是避免误认为修饰object
pieces。不过没有100％把握。

dinghy321 wrote:
可否理解为
The shaping device is placed behind a part of the first and second object pieces, (and) is heated by the heating device, in the X direction.
即理解为主语相同、省略了第二句子中的主语及俩个句子之间的连词and。

单从语法分析有可能，但从专业来说可能不对。专利翻译还是很需要专业知识的。

“专业知识在正确翻译中的必不可少性”

indispensability of speciality knowledge for (to) correct translation

专业知识对正确翻译的必不可少性

还是要看具体的context。

wittyfool是不是偷换了概念？dangling participle指分词作状语的情况，可是这里分词是作定语。不知对不对，还要深入研究。

觉得应该是修饰first and second objects section,不过不能确定

感谢大家回答哦，看来好像很难单纯从语法上推测意思哦。