dangling participle

Question

0 Textbooks say it is considered a mistake to make sentences where an  adverbial participle clause has a different subject from the main  clause, except for some expressions referring to the speakers's  attitude---such as 'generally speaking', 'judging from...' and  'considering...'---or when the main clause has preparatory 'it' or  'there' as a subject.02br02br00  Let me ask you native speakers. In reality, is it really so?02br02br00  You never ever make such a 'mistake'? Isn't there any case where you  start out your sentence with an adverbial participle clause, with the  underlying subject of it in your subconscious mind or something, and  then you come up the main sentence whose subject is different from that  of the adverbial clause? 02br02br00  Personally, I think there should be...It seems quite 'human' to make such a 'mistake'...0-

Clive · Accepted Answer

0Hi,02br
02br
00Definitely. We often start to speak with no clear idea of what we are going to say. In fact, we often speak in fragments that are far from proper sentences at all.02br
02br
00In writing, we have the opportunity to be a little more disciplined.02br
02br
00Clive 0-

Taka · Answer

0 (A typo in my previous post: come up the sentence=>come up with the sentence---I happened to delete it by mistake).02br
02br
02br
00 Clive,02br
02br
00Good! Thank you. Glad to know that you are all human.05002br
02br
00 Let me ask another question about adverbial participles.02br
02br
00 Most of the grammar books written by a Japanese say the use of adverbial participles is 01i00quite02i00 formal and you don't hear or see them in daily use.02br
02br
00 In reality, is it that formal?02br
02br
00 Personally, I heard them used even in daily conversations when I was in the States...010id1

Clive · Answer

0Hi,02br
02br
00It's hard for me to analyse the speech I hear in that way, it's something I just don't ever think about. How about you give me a couple of examples of the kind of thing you are thinking about, and I'll tell you how typical I think they would be?02br
02br
00Clive0-

Taka · Answer

0 01blockquote

01cite10Clive12cite10Hi,12br
12br
10It's hard for me to analyse the speech I hear in that way, it's something I just don't ever think about. How about you give me a couple of examples of the kind of thing you are thinking about, and I'll tell you how typical I think they would be?12br
12br
10Clive12br
12blockquote

12br
00 Ah, yes, examples.02br
02br
01font01i00・He got confused, not knowing why it happened that way.02br
00 ・She sat on the grass, looking at the setting sun.02br
02br
02i00Do they sound formal to you? To me, they don't at all.02br
02br
00 Some books written by a Japanese even say that use of adverbial participles is so formal that you rarely hear them used in daily conversations and you don't see them often in usual writing; I doubt it; I don't think it's that formal.02br
02br
00 Are you with the books, Clive?02br
02br
01i02br
02i02font00 0-

Clive · Answer

0Hi,02br
02br
00No, I'm with you.02br
02br
00Clive0-

CalifJim · Answer

0 Taka,02br
02br
00 I think it depends on the population you survey.02br
00 Take, for example, the journalists who report the local news and the local people of the community whom the journalists interview during a 'breaking story'. Let's suppose that our example is a story on a convenience store robbery in a dubious area of a large city - an incident in which shots were fired and people were hurt.02br
00 In my humble opinion, if you surveyed the speech of all journalists in the U.S. in that sort of position, reporting a story, and then surveyed the speech of all the main actors in the story itself -- the perpetrators, the injured, the witnesses -- and in similar stories throughout the U.S., you would find quite a large difference in the two survey results.02br
00 The journalist group might occasionally use the sorts of adverbial structures you are interested in; the other group, almost never.02br
00 My estimate is that "ordinary people" whose job is not related to language at all, i.e., not journalists, writers, teachers, etc., rarely use these structures in everyday conversation. I'll try to keep my ears open in the next few weeks, and I'll report it if I hear any significantly frequent use of such grammatical devices!02br
02br
00 CJ0-

Taka · Answer

0 01blockquote

01cite10CalifJim12cite10 My estimate is that "ordinary people" whose job is not related to language at all rarely use these structures in everyday conversation. 12br
12br
10 CJ12br
12br
12blockquote

12br
00 CJ,02br
02br
00 Before you proceed your survey, let me ask you somthing.02br
02br
00 Why do you think 'ordinary people' rarely use the structures in everyday conversation? What kind of psychology do you think there might be working behind which makes you hesitate to use them?0-

CalifJim · Answer

0 I'm not sure it's a matter of hesitation to use them. It's a matter of some internal knowledge of when it is more appropriate and when less appropriate to use them.02br
00 I think that these structures introduce a certain amount of subtlety of expression that finds its natural home in literary works rather than in ordinary conversation. It has to do with style and with the very subject matter itself of a literary creation and an ordinary conversation. Talking about complicated things and/or trying to make them interesting to read leads us to form more complicated and indirect structures. Talking about simple things leads us to speak more simply and directly.02br
02br
01i00 The report having been created, it was distributed to the employees.02i00 (Formal written language.)02br
01i00 We created the report, and handed it out to the employees.02i00 (Informal conversational account of the same fact.)02br
02br
01i00Finding that 4 o'clock was unavailable for her hair appointment, Mary settled for 5 o'clock.02i00 (Too formal for the everyday nature of the subject matter. This is an absolutely unimaginable statement if it is to be a statement of one friend to another. This is clothing a beggar in kingly robes, let's say!)02br
01i00Mary tried to get a hair appointment at 4, but nothing was available then, so she settled for 5.02i00 (More authentic version.)02br
02br
00 CJ0-

Taka · Answer

0 01blockquote

01cite10CalifJim12cite12br
10 Talking about complicated things and/or trying to make them interesting to read leads us to form more complicated and indirect structures. 12br
10 CJ12br
12br
12blockquote

12br
00 Wow! I see it exactly the same way as you do, CJ.02br
02br
00 I just don't think such is an 01i00exclusive02i00 feature of formal writing 02br
02br
00 Another thing is, as Clive agreed, I think there should be some cases, even in daily conversations (or in informal writing), where you start to speak with no clear idea of what we are going to say and end up with an 'interesting' sentence, without intention.02br
0-

CalifJim · Answer

0 01blockquote

00 I just don't think such is an 11i10exclusive12i10 feature of formal writing 12br
12br
10 Another thing is, as Clive agreed, I think there should be some cases, even in daily conversations (or in informal writing), where you start to speak with no clear idea of what we are going to say and end up with an 'interesting' sentence, without intention.12blockquote

10Amen!02br
02br
00 CJ0-

dangling participle

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions