0
Anonymous Posted 10 years ago
Grammar
The same "Ing"-form in different meanings?
Hello,
I'am working on the exercises given in "English grammar in use". But one thing irritates me:
Unit 68 (ing- clauses)
Joe was playing football. He hurt his knee.
= Joe hurt his knee playing football.
And unit 97 (relative clauses)
The woman ist talking to Tom. Do you know the woman.
= Do you know the woman talking to Tom?
... How can you know, whether the "ing"-Form goes with the subject "Joe" (first sentence) or with the relative clause-subject "woman" (second sentence).
Because I easily can construct sentences, where I don't know, which word the "ing" Form ist referring to.
Like
"The man loves his dog running to the woman."
Now either the man or the dog could be running, and the meaning would differ. I have a feeling though, that this sentence is just rubbish - but why? where is the grammar rule in this?
Thx!
I'am working on the exercises given in "English grammar in use". But one thing irritates me:
Unit 68 (ing- clauses)
Joe was playing football. He hurt his knee.
= Joe hurt his knee playing football.
And unit 97 (relative clauses)
The woman ist talking to Tom. Do you know the woman.
= Do you know the woman talking to Tom?
... How can you know, whether the "ing"-Form goes with the subject "Joe" (first sentence) or with the relative clause-subject "woman" (second sentence).
Because I easily can construct sentences, where I don't know, which word the "ing" Form ist referring to.
Like
"The man loves his dog running to the woman."
Now either the man or the dog could be running, and the meaning would differ. I have a feeling though, that this sentence is just rubbish - but why? where is the grammar rule in this?
Thx!
Top answer
' is 'common sense'. Even with obvious dangling participle clause, few but pedants fail to understand the intended meaning. Actually, even pedants understand the intended meaning; they just disapprove of the style.
- ' is 'common sense'.
- Even with obvious dangling participle clause, few but pedants fail to understand the intended meaning.
- Actually, even pedants understand the intended meaning; they just disapprove of the style.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
The simple answer to the question 'How do we know?' is 'common sense'.
Even with obvious dangling participle clause, few but pedants fail to understand the intended meaning. Actually, even pedants understand the intended meaning; they just disapprove of the style.
Even with obvious dangling participle clause, few but pedants fail to understand the intended meaning. Actually, even pedants understand the intended meaning; they just disapprove of the style.
00
Thank you!
But I still don't know whether I could use the sentence like above and what would be it's meaning.
"The man loves his dog running to the woman."
I'm not trying to be a pedant, I just want to understand all the grammar - probably this is my mistake :/
But I still don't know whether I could use the sentence like above and what would be it's meaning.
"The man loves his dog running to the woman."
I'm not trying to be a pedant, I just want to understand all the grammar - probably this is my mistake :/
00
Both proximity ('running' is next to 'dog') and common sense tell us that it is the dog that is running.
It's not a very natural sentence, however. I'd probably say 'The man loves to see his dog runnng to the woman'.
It's not a very natural sentence, however. I'd probably say 'The man loves to see his dog runnng to the woman'.
0
Related Questions