0
English 1b3 Posted 17 years ago
Grammar

Participle Phrase in this sentence

"It is important to grasp the overall meaning of the clause, perhaps putting an answer to it."

I read this sentence (on this forum) by a good writer; I don't understand the use of the participle phrase in bold.

If it were written as below, I think the participle phrase works:

"You should grasp the overall meaning of the clause, perhaps putting an answer to it."

Now, the participle phrase functions adjectivally and modifies the subject 'you.'

But how does the participle phrase in the original work? Does it work in the original sentence?

Also, how is the infinitive phrase 'to grasp...' functioning?





  

Top answer

I would like to ask a further/related question on this. Pariciple phrases function adjectivally or adverbially. They are set off from the main clause by comma(s).

  • I would like to ask a further/related question on this.
  • Pariciple phrases function adjectivally or adverbially.
  • They are set off from the main clause by comma(s).
  • Since they function as such, they can modify virtually anything sentence--any noun, pronoun, infinitive phrases, the whole clause, or the verb phrase.
  • I thought that he was walking home, thinking about what he had done.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

5 Answers
0
I would like to ask a further/related question on this.

Pariciple phrases function adjectivally or adverbially. They are set off from the main clause by comma(s).

Since they function as such, they can modify virtually anything sentence--any noun, pronoun, infinitive phrases, the whole clause, or the verb phrase.

I thought that he was walking home, thinking about what
0
"It is important to grasp the overall meaning of the clause, perhaps putting an answer to it."
...

"You should grasp the overall meaning of the clause, perhaps putting an answer to it."

0
English 1b3I thought that he was walking home, thinking about what he had done.

This could technically modify either I or he, correct?
As written, it's hard to see it modifying I. You have two clauses there, and your participle phrase is positioned closer to the second clause. But if the participle phrase were first, it would be s
0
1) So is it correct to say that a participle phrase can modify any noun/pronoun in a sentence and usually modifies the word to which it is closest?

Example:

I saw the man who was fighiting my friend earlier this week, trying to beat him to death with nothing but a stick and two fists.

2) Does this modify the (relative) pronoun who, (the man)?

-----------
0
English 1b3 usually modifies the word to which it is closest?
Yes. That's it. Usually. But it's not required. The meaning may point obviously to another interpretation.
English 1b3I saw the man who was fighiting my friend earlier this week, trying to beat him to death with nothing but a stick and two fists.

2

Related Questions