participle as a subject

Question

Hi,Is it possible to use a participle as a subject?Disposed are ones that put aforth foul smells.

Mr Wordy · Accepted Answer

Yes, this style is possible (with the verb "to be"), but it's unusual in everyday speech or writing. It has a poetic, literary or sometimes old-fashioned feel. The past participle is effectively acting as an adjective. So,

The sky is blue / Blue is the sky

And similarly:

The golden bowl is broken / Broken is the golden bowl

The same is true of those present participles that can behave adjectivally, again with the same poetic feel:

My pounding heart / My heart was pounding / Pounding was my heart

Cool Breeze · Answer

Mr WordyThe golden bowl is broken / Broken is the golden bowl

The same is true of those present participles that can behave adjectivally, again with the same poetic feel:

My pounding heart / My heart was pounding / Pounding was my heart

Hi Mr Wordy
I have no objection to the sentences but the participles are not subjects in them, which can clearly be seen if we use a plural subject. In English a plural subject requires a plural verb:
Pounding were our hearts! Broken are the golden bowls.
CB

BarbaraPA · Answer

To have it be the subject, you would have say something like "Damaged? You call this "damaged"? Ruined is how I would describe it. Useless is what it is now."

It's certainly not very common.

Mr Wordy · Answer

Cool Breezethe participles are not subjects in them

Thanks CB... I should have noticed that.

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousIs it possible to use a participle as a subject?

Unless you use the cleft structure, as GG did, I don't think it can be done. The basic problem is that a participle is an adjective. Adjectives can't be subjects. Only nouns (or pronouns) can.
CJ

Cool Breeze · Answer

CalifJimThe basic problem is that a participle is an adjective. Adjectives can't be subjects. Only nouns (or pronouns) can.
CJ

I am walking. Walking is an adjective?
To hear him sing is an unforgettable experience. To hear is an infinitive, in other words, a verb, not a noun or a pronoun. Using an infinitive as a subject may not be common in American English but it has been used that way for centuries - and is used as a subject in other varieties of English even today.
CB

Anonymous · Answer

Hi,

You wrote:

To hear is an infinitive, in other words, a verb, not a noun or a pronoun.

Is an infinitive really a verb? Does that mean a gerund is a verb too? I know an infintive like the one you used and a gerund act as a noun.

CalifJim · Answer

Cool BreezeI am walking. Walking is an adjective?

"allegedly"

See below.

From Introduction to the Grammar of English (Huddleston, Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics)
... participles are said to be 'verbal adjectives'.
First example given:
He was telling the truth.
Later:
... a present participle ... allegedly has adjectival properties. I say 'allegedly' because it is difficult to see any significant functional resemblance to an adjective ... [in the first example on the list].

He goes on to say that the -ing words in such examples are clearly verbs, while in other contexts they are clearly adjectives.
___
With respect to the original question then, I suppose the more accurate description is that participles are either parts of verb phrases or are adjectives. In either case, a participle -- being verb or adjective -- cannot be the subject of a sentence unless it is in the cleft sentence structure, as illustrated earlier in the thread by GG. I think that's the only structure that allows a participle or an adjective to be promoted to the status of a noun phrase so it can be a subject.
At least that's my claim. Maybe someone can provide a counterexample. That would be instructive.
Edit:
'Destroyed' is the best description of that town.
Here a participle (adjective) is promoted to a noun and is the subject of the sentence. So there are cases other than the cleft sentence structure that allow it. Nevertheless, note the quotes. It works in the same way that anything in quotes can be promoted to subject:
'Xygneoowytoeyy' is a nonsense word.
'got into the truck' is not a complete sentence.

___
Your question opens up a good many sticky points in the terminology. Do we (Can we) talk about certain structures by naming them without regard to their function in context? Or not? Probably not. Is love a noun or a verb? Only context will tell.

Cool BreezeTo hear him sing is an unforgettable experience.

to hear him sing is a sentence with a non-finite verb used as a noun phrase in a higher level sentence. The idea is that the terminological identity of a word or group of words may change depending on which level in a hierarchy of clauses it is considered. At the lowest level of the "tree", to hear is indeed an infinitive (a non-finite verb), but in the context of the whole sentence (higher in the hierarchical tree), to hear him sing is the subject of the main clause, is nominal in nature, and is called a noun phrase. (Infinitives are often nominal in nature, so this is not surprising; for example, [I want + noun phrase] can take either of these forms: I want some pizza. I want to sing.)

Cool BreezeUsing an infinitive as a subject may not be common in American English

Actually, infinitives are used in AmE as subjects. The location geographically or historically has nothing to do with it. But infinitives (and their complement(s), if any), taken together, can make noun phrases.
To be absolutely precise, it is a noun phrase (NP) that must be the subject of a sentence. I oversimplified by saying 'noun or pronoun'.
CJ

Cool Breeze · Answer

CalifJimYour question opens up a good many sticky points in the terminology. Do we (Can we) talk about certain structures by naming them without regard to their function in context? Or not? Probably not. Is love a noun or a verb? Only context will tell.

Hmm... this seems to be another case of varying terminology. I have no objection to calling a participle an adjective, I'm just not used to that. Nor am I used to many other grammatical terms used here, like "a noun phrase". Don't get me wrong! I certainly don't mean there's anything wrong with it or that it is worse or better than the terms I am used to. I just had never heard it before I hit these forums. I can guess at the meaning of such expressions, of course.
The terminology must sometimes be confusing to learners whose native languages are so different from English that they don't even have verbs, let alone participles or gerunds!

I can't start using terms I am not familiar with and thus I use the terms I learned to use in school ages ago. Hopefully I'll still be of use and assistance to some learners, at least to those who come from European countries. I'm sure I sometimes just confuse native speakers of English.
That tradition is centuries old in Europe. It is probably based on early grammarians' work and analysis of Latin. For example, "my" and its equivalents in all the grammar books that I have read and that deal with Finnish, Swedish, German, English and Latin grammar is invariably called a pronoun. In America, I think it's a called a possessive adjective? Perhaps in Britain too. Of course it isn't used instead of a noun and thus the name is misleading, but grammarians just call it a possessive pronoun anyway. It is a matter of what has been more or less consciously agreed upon. I have seen the term "dependent possessive pronoun" used to refer to "my", and the term "independent possessive pronoun" has been applied to words like "mine" because they don't need a noun after them. Therefore they are "independent". If I began to use such terms here, I'm sure I would confuse people even more!

Yes, context will tell, and I think it is plain to see in all cases. In Finnish, there are no such problems - if that is a problem at all. A noun cannot be mistaken for a verb. Nouns and verbs are always different words.
Cheers, CB

Cool Breeze · Answer

AnonymousYou wrote:

To hear is an infinitive, in other words, a verb, not a noun or a pronoun.

Is an infinitive really a verb? Does that mean a gerund is a verb too? I know an infintive like the one you used and a gerund act as a noun.

Please read my reply to CalifJim. Terminology varies. I know - at least I think I know

- that in America the gerund is considered a noun. Europe views it differently; it is neither a noun nor a verb, it is a cross between them. All nouns can have anadjectival attribute, gerunds cannot: Correct speaking English is easy. Wrong! A noun cannot have an object, a gerund can: Speaking English is easy.
It's of course fine with me if people consider the gerund a noun, I'm just not used to the idea of a noun taking an object and thus prefer the European view. This is actually quite similar to Europeans' calling words like "my" possessive pronouns, isn't it?

Where I come from infinitives are called verbs, so I call them that. Anyone is free to call them different names if they please.
CB

participle as a subject

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions