0
Fulaoshi Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Absolute Structure and Convention
Hello everyone!
I have a particular student who knows her grammar, but is somewhat defensive. I love her questions, but I have to find the best answer possible to subdue her. She always has good questions and keeps me learning, which I love! So here is the latest.
The sentence that she gave to demonstrate absolute structure was,
"More time given, we could have done better."
I didn't say it was WRONG, but it's certainly awkward. "More time given..." is the noun phrase that is modifying the independent clause, "...we could have done better." Given is the past participial form of give, and it makes sense to put that after the noun "time", but I know of no one that wouldn't say, "Given more time, we could have done better." Placing "given" after the noun just seems terribly awkward. Is this just a matter of convention, or is there a specific rule that dictates why "given" should be at the end of the noun phrase.
Hope someone can share some insight!
I have a particular student who knows her grammar, but is somewhat defensive. I love her questions, but I have to find the best answer possible to subdue her. She always has good questions and keeps me learning, which I love! So here is the latest.
The sentence that she gave to demonstrate absolute structure was,
"More time given, we could have done better."
I didn't say it was WRONG, but it's certainly awkward. "More time given..." is the noun phrase that is modifying the independent clause, "...we could have done better." Given is the past participial form of give, and it makes sense to put that after the noun "time", but I know of no one that wouldn't say, "Given more time, we could have done better." Placing "given" after the noun just seems terribly awkward. Is this just a matter of convention, or is there a specific rule that dictates why "given" should be at the end of the noun phrase.
Hope someone can share some insight!
Top answer
" Well, it's not a natural sentence that a native speaker would use. You really need the complete conditional sentence. Either of these would be OK: If more time had been given, we could have done better.
- " Well, it's not a natural sentence that a native speaker would use.
- You really need the complete conditional sentence.
- Either of these would be OK: If more time had been given, we could have done better.
- Had more time been given, we could have done better.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
8 Answers
0
fulaoshi"More time given, we could have done better."Well, it's not a natural sentence that a native speaker would use.
You really need the complete conditional sentence. Either of these would be OK:
If more time had been given, we could have done better.
Had more time been given, we could have done better.
00
I think that "More time given, we could have done better" is unnatural to the point where one could reasonably say it is wrong.
In the natural order, "Given more time, ....", the word "given" seems to be behaving as a preposition. Past participles generally cannot do that, so "given" seems to be a special case. Another suggestion might be that it is short for "If we were given more time",
In the natural order, "Given more time, ....", the word "given" seems to be behaving as a preposition. Past participles generally cannot do that, so "given" seems to be a special case. Another suggestion might be that it is short for "If we were given more time",
00
I think that these constructions are fine, if rather formal.
Given more time, we could have done /could do better.
Rejected by the electorate, he went into self-imposed exile.
Offered more money, he accepted the position.
Given more time, we could have done /could do better.
Rejected by the electorate, he went into self-imposed exile.
Offered more money, he accepted the position.
00
fulaoshiMore time given, we could have done better.I think there may be a hidden rule that when such a structure must be interpreted as an if-clause for a "second conditional", the participle must come first. I've never seen such a rule written anywhere, however. Maybe someone will come up with a counterexample.
A bigger salary offered, I
00
GPYIn the natural order, "Given more time, ....", the word "given" seems to be behaving as a preposition.I tend to agree with you on the "past pasrticiple version " which is , if I am correct, a reduced passive participle clause of " If we were given more time , we could have done better. In the reduced form, it still functioned adverbially, pr
00
grammarfreak That said, I think adding "if" to the phrase makes the entire phrase flow better in my opinion.These absolute constructions seem to pop up everywhere.
00
CalifJimOffered a bigger salary, I would have taken the job. OK.For me, this is marginal.
00
Well I'm really glad that this wasn't some simple rule I was overlooking. Wow, this is great insight! Thank you all! I think I'll have to show my student this post and explain that the rule is set in stone.
0
Related Questions