Finding the subject of a participle

Question

An English textbook states the following:

"It would not be winter without a chance to ice skate in one of New York City’s most celebrated locations.

Here you will find both New Yorkers and visitors, skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights."

I have two questions:

A. Does the second sentence natural as it is with comma after "visitors"?

B. In the most salient interpretation of the second sentence, what do you think the subject of the participle "skating" is? Is it "you" or "both New Yorkers and visitors"?

Thanks!

Clive · Accepted Answer

A Yes

B "both New Yorkers and visitors"

Anonymous · Answer

CliveA YesB "both New Yorkers and visitors"

Thanks a lot, Clive.
Your answer certainly cleared things up for me.

If I may, let me ask you another question on syntax and punctuation in the OP.

The OP has a comma after "skating". What if we remove this comma?

Two possible scenarios that I can think of are set forth here for your confirmation:

(1) Once removed the syntax changes rather dramatically. Specifically, the participial clause ("skating under...") will now be a complement of the verb ("find") rather than a modifier of the noun phrase ("both New Yorkers and visitors")--the latter being the function of the participial clause before removing the comma.

(2) Even after the comma is removed, there is no syntactic change at all.

Which do you think is right?
Or if there's other scenario(s) please let me know.

Clive · Answer

Here you will find both New Yorkers and visitors skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights.
A native speaker considers not only grammar but also (and primarily) what the most reasonable meaning is. So, he/she would take this to have the same meaning as the version with the comma.

If the writer intended any other meaning, he would word the sentence differently.
eg Here you will find both visitors skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights, and New Yorkers.
eg Here, as you are skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop
of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights, you will find both New Yorkers and visitors.

Clive

Anonymous · Answer

CliveSo, he/she would take this to have the same meaning as the version with the comma.

Is it because the recovered subject of the participle "skating" remains the same with or without the comma?

Also, I was wondering if you could comment on my syntactic analysis in my previous post.

Again, thank you for taking time to answering my question.

Clive · Answer

Here you will find both New Yorkers and visitors skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights

CliveSo, he/she would take this to have the same meaning as the version with the comma.

Is it because the recovered subject of the participle "skating" remains the same with or without the comma?
It's mainly because the first sentence in your original post makes it clear that the writer is going to focus on skating. The people he then talks about are going to be skating.Also, when a good writer constructs a sentence like this that is based on the word 'both', the idea of 'parallelism' suggests that both sets of people share the same attributes, ie both group are skating.

Also, I was wondering if you could comment on my syntactic analysis in my previous post. I don't disagree with your analysis, but my point is that you need to consider reasonable and intended meaning as well as grammar. It is sometimes helpful to consider how you would go about understanding a sentence like this if it were spoken with just a very slight pause rather than read with a visible comma.

Clive

Anonymous · Answer

"It would not be winter without a chance to ice skate in one of New York City’s most celebrated locations.

Here you will find both New Yorkers and visitors, skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights."

CliveI don't disagree with your analysis, but my point is that you need to consider reasonable and intended meaning as well as grammar. It is sometimes helpful to consider how you would go about understanding a sentence like this if it were spoken with just a very slight pause rather than read with a visible comma.

Thanks, Clive.

There is one last thing that I'd like to have your answer on.

In the OP (the version with the comma before "skating"), do you consider the participial clause ("skating under...") to be (1) a complement of the verb "find" or (2) a modifier of the noun phrase ("both New Yorkers and visitors")?

Clive · Answer

Here you will find both New Yorkers and visitors, skating under the watchful eyes of the golden statue of Prometheus and the unique urban backdrop of Rockefeller Center’s sparkling lights."

In the OP (the version with the comma before "skating"), do you consider the participial clause ("skating under...") to be
(1) a complement of the verb "find"
Are you asking me if I think it means 'while you are skating . . . , you will find both New Yorkers and other people'? No, that meaning seems almost ridiculous to me.

or (2) a modifier of the noun phrase ("both New Yorkers and visitors")? Yes

Clive

Anonymous · Answer

Clive,
I agree with you that the OP may not mean "while you are skating..., you will find both New Yorkers and visitors".

But that's not what I meant by (1) ("skating..." being a complement of the verb "find").

Let me give you an example of a participle being a complement of "find".

"The doctor found two patients waiting for him."

Here, "him" refers back to "the doctor". And "waiting for him" is a complement of the verb "found", because "waiting for him" is not simply there to modify "two patients", but because it is required to be there by "found".

If you understood what I meant by (1), then could you please confirm that the OP's "skating under..." is not a complement of "find"?

Clive · Answer

Here, "him" refers back to "the doctor". Yes, of course

And "waiting for him" is a complement of the verb "found", because "waiting for him" is not simply there to modify "two patients", I see as just modifying 'two patients'.
because it is required to be there by "found". I don't see it as required by 'found'. Why do you think it is required?

Clive

Anonymous · Answer

Clive I don't see it as required by 'found'. Why do you think it is required?

I see what you're saying.

But let me explain why I think it's required.

A. "The doctor found two patients."
B. "The doctor found two patients waiting for him."
C. "The doctor found two patients not waiting for him."

In these sentences, do you think "found" means the same thing?
I for one don't.

In A and B, the meaning makes it look like "found" means the same thing, but in A and C, it's clear "found" doesn't mean the same thing.

What do you think?

Finding the subject of a participle

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions