Participle phrases

Question

Hi everyone,I'm doing a little bit of writing in my spare time and I'm trying to expand my repertoire of sentence types.I'm having trouble with one particular part of speech, the participle phrase. I'm ok with it when it's before a main clause, but when it's after the main clause, i'm a little confused.I think i get the main idea, but i'm just not sure if the same rules apply regardless of whether it's before or after the clause.the following is ok, I'm pretty sure:1   Being a cautious man by nature, he decided to hold back.how about these? :2   The knocking on the  door was soft and discreet, bringing with it a distinct feeling of  humility.3   he, too, had flown the  red flag flag, eagerly scolding the goings on of big business.4   The images were vivid,  transporting Kim into a fantasy world of violence and brutality.5   he sank back into his  chair, breathing heavily and feeling his heart rate shoot up.i think no.4 might be wrong. not sure about the others.i realise that i could just rewrite them and do without the participle phrase, but i want to improve my writing. sure, no.4 could be rewritten as:the images were vivid, and kim was immediately transported into a fantasy world of...thanks in advance, much appreciated

Dimsumexpress · Accepted Answer

Hi Welcome to the
English forum. I agree, # 4 appeared a bit
awkward to me as well, as it didn't quite have enough context to qualify the
sentence. As stand, these words didn't paint a picture that I could see. But
all the other are present participle phrases functioning as adverbial.
These "ing" form of the verbs are none-finite, and they only describe a
state or being, not the act in progress.

BillJ · Answer

Hello, and welcome to EnglishForward.com

Sorry to be pedantic, but all of the examples you cite are actually participial clauses, not phrases, and a participial clause is not a part of speech - it's just a kind of non-finite clause. The good news is that the style of each sentence (including 4.) is absolutely fine - quite eloquent in fact - so no quibbles there at all. You mentioned the position of the participial clauses: in many cases, participial adjunct clauses like these are mobile and can be in front position as well as at the end of the matrix clause. In your examples, 1, 3 and 5. the participial clauses could certainly be fronted grammatically, but arguably with a slight reduction in style, whereas 2. and 4 would not be acceptable. Generally, I think you've grasped the use of participial adjunct clauses very well.

BillJ

Huxwellian · Answer

thank you very much for your speedy reply.

you've shed some light on the situation for me and it's interesting that you agree that #4 is a bit odd.

the last past of your answer interests me greatly. could i ask you to give me an example of a clause that describes the act in progress? i know it'll be nonsensical but it'll help me to distinguish...

thanks again

Huxwellian · Answer

BillJ,
don't apologise for your pedantry, as that's exactly what i came to this site for! having the correct term, participle clauses, has helped me to search the web and find many more examples.

thanks again

Dimsumexpress · Answer

For some unkwown reasons, my "reply" tab disappeared fromthe webpage. So if my psot appeared to be messed up, I apologize.

When I made my comment about #4's being odd, I actually had this thought process:
What exactly was that vivid image? Is it a mental or physical one? Not clear!
Was "transporting" used as a figure of speech? To me, it carries a hint of physical movement.
I couldn't connect these words together to form a visualized picture without further context. As for the participle phrases (or clauses, as other may call), this is what this link says:

http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/clauses-11.html

ADJECTIVE CLAUSE	PRESENT PARTICIPLE PHRASE
Sentences or clauses with ACTIVE verb forms can be shortened to modifying phrases.	Delete the pronoun and change the verb to its present participle form (-ing).
Congress, which consists of two houses, is on a break.	Congress, consisting of two houses, is on a break.
The stock market, which crashed to its lowest point of the year, worried us.	The stock market, crashing to its lowest point of the year, worried us.
Gas which costs over $4 a gallon can be seen in the Bay Area.	Gas costing over $4 a gallon can be seen in the Bay Area.

For your last question, I presume that you meant past progressive, is that correct?
<< could i ask you to give me an example of a clause that describes the act in progress?>>
How about:
As I was running out of my apartment from the fire next door I shouted "fire" and pounded the door of my roommate, John, who was still sleeping like a baby.

BillJ · Answer

dimsumexpressAs for the participle phrases (or clauses, as other may call), this is what this link says:
http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/clauses-11.html

ADJECTIVE CLAUSEPRESENT PARTICIPLE PHRASE
Sentences or clauses with ACTIVE verb forms can be shortened to modifying phrases. Delete the pronoun and change the verb to its present participle form (-ing).
Congress, which consists of two houses, is on a break.Congress, consisting of two houses, is on a break.
The stock market, which crashed to its lowest point of the year, worried us.The stock market, crashing to its lowest point of the year, worried us.
Gas which costs over $4 a gallon can be seen in the Bay Area.Gas costing over $4 a gallon can be seen in the Bay Area.

Instead of providing a link to a website that dispenses ill-informed, long out-of-date and thus misleading advice about English grammar, why don't you tell us all exactly why YOU consider that the adjunct expressions in the OP's post are phrases not clauses? I'd be interested to learn.

BillJ

Dimsumexpress · Answer

BillJ,
Your comments are quite blunt and seemingly directed at me to infer that I purposely post what you have called " ill-informed" material. As you may have already noticed, I am not a born native, however, for the record, I have studied and worked as an tech porfessional in California for 30 years. Purhaps I may have been taught wrong, Or perhaps varing definition and usage of opposite shores. That said, I have learned that a phrase is not a complete sentence which may contain one or more of the following, but not a subject and finite verb.
Prepoistion
adverb
adjective
past and present participle

Wasn't the original posted question matching this criterian?

And byt the way, allow me to post another link. Please tell me if this is also out-dated.

Dimsumexpress · Answer

I may have posted the last thread withour including this link.

http://writing-program.uchicago.edu/resources/complex-sentences.htm

CalifJim · Answer

dimsumexpressPlease tell me if this is also out-dated.

It depends on your point of view. In academic linguistics the terminology can be quite different. Over the past 50 years there have been many changes in approach and terminology, most of which are quite logical, orderly, and systematic, but all of which can appear to be an impenetrable web of complexities to the uninitiated. (See The Linguistics Warsby Randy Allen Harris.) The wisdom of the ivory tower has not very successfully filtered down to the ordinary English classroom, however, and you will find that the majority of terminology used on our forum is still stuck in the pre-60's era. Even recently published materials for the general reader stick to the older approach, such as the link you posted, for example. And many students abroad, though not all, are using these kinds of materials. This means that we inevitably confuse them at times by using terminology that is more up-to-date when their text books are in the old style, or by using old style terminology when their sources are more up-to-date. The definitions of "phrase" and "clause" are just two examples among many. You can't really win either way! Somebody somewhere is going to find a page in their textbook that claims you've used the wrong term for something or other, no matter which term you use.

CJ

Dimsumexpress · Answer

Thank you CJ for the insightful explanation. As always, your opinions are greatly respected. As I said before, I may have been taught wrong in light of these changes. I understand there are many types of clauses, such as dependent and independent clauses. That said, I have to admit, I feel confused at time as well. Take this, among others, for example, It referered to "affirming the ruling..." as a phrase. but they call the whole structure a clause.

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw/grinker/LwtaDependant_Clauses_and_Phrases.htm
4. Turning Phrases into Sentences. One generally can turn any phrase into a sentence by combining it with an independent clause and one or more punctuation marks or conjunctions.

Incorrect: The appellate court held that the evidence was inadmissible. Affirming the trial court's ruling.

Correct: The appellate court held that the evidence was inadmissible, affirming the trial court's ruling.

So, if what the previous poster said was true, then some of the knowledge most many of us posesses may be relics in the sense that if these changes are not filtered down fast enough. In any case, for my own knowledge sake, can you kindly tell me, if my comments were indeed outdated?

Thank you.

Participle phrases

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions