Omitting in Past Participle?

Question

"Focused on the sound of the water's trickle, he traced it back to the source."

I learnt that when the sentence starts with p.p, the original sentence was a passive voice.

So what's the original sentence?

I'm thinking it might be "The sound of the water's trickle was focused on by him and he traced it back to the source" but if so, why didn't they use 'focusing' instead?

He focused on the sound of the water's trickle and he traced it to the source. = Focusing on the sound of the water's trickle, he traced it to the source.

Or is it possible to just omit the subject in past tense sentence?

I mean if the sentence is "She focused on the problem and she solved it", can we just omit the subject and be "Focused on the problem, she solved it."?

GPY · Accepted Answer

AppleFanboy"Focused on the sound of the water's trickle, he traced it back to the source."

It means "He was focused on the sound". "focused" is adjectival here.

AppleFanboywhy didn't they use 'focusing' instead?

"focusing" would also work with more or less the same meaning but emphasis on action rather than state.

AppleFanboyHe focused on the sound of the water's trickle and he traced it to the source.

This also has roughly the same meaning, but only "accidentally" because "he focused" and "he was focused" have similar meanings. The difference is more obvious with another verb:

"Arrested by the police, he spent the night in the cells." -> "He was arrested" (not "He arrested")

AppleFanboyI mean if the sentence is "She focused on the problem and she solved it", can we just omit the subject and be "Focused on the problem, she solved it."?

In general, no. Again, the meaning in this example is similar only because of the special propertes of "focus(ed)". (For some reason this example does not work quite as well for me as the original.)

Omitting in Past Participle?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions