Look at these examples to see how participle clauses are used.
Looked after carefully, these boots will last for many years.
Not wanting to hurt his feelings, I avoided the question.
Having lived through difficult times together, they were very close friends.
Try this exercise to test your grammar.
- Grammar test 1
Read the explanation to learn more.
Grammar explanation
Participle clauses enable us to say information in a more economical way. They are formed using present participles (going, reading, seeing, walking, etc.), past participles (gone, read, seen, walked, etc.) or perfect participles (having gone, having read, having seen, having walked, etc.).
We can use participle clauses when the participle and the verb in the main clause have the same subject. For example,
Waiting for Ellie, I made some tea. (While I was waiting for Ellie, I made some tea.)
Participle clauses do not have a specific tense. The tense is indicated by the verb in the main clause.
Participle clauses are mainly used in written texts, particularly in a literary, academic or journalistic style.
Present participle clauses
Here are some common ways we use present participle clauses. Note that present participles have a similar meaning to active verbs.
- To give the result of an action
The bomb exploded, destroying the building. - To give the reason for an action
Knowing she loved reading, Richard bought her a book. - To talk about an action that happened at the same time as another action
Standing in the queue, I realised I didn't have any money. - To add information about the subject of the main clause
Starting in the new year, the new policy bans cars in the city centre.
Past participle clauses
Here are some common ways that we use past participle clauses. Note that past participles normally have a passive meaning.
- With a similar meaning to an if condition
Used in this way, participles can make your writing more concise. (If you use participles in this way, … ) - To give the reason for an action
Worried by the news, she called the hospital. - To add information about the subject of the main clause
Filled with pride, he walked towards the stage.
Perfect participle clauses
Perfect participle clauses show that the action they describe was finished before the action in the main clause. Perfect participles can be structured to make an active or passive meaning.
Having got dressed, he slowly went downstairs.
Having finished their training, they will be fully qualified doctors.
Having been made redundant, she started looking for a new job.
Participle clauses after conjunctions and prepositions
It is also common for participle clauses, especially with -ing, to follow conjunctions and prepositions such as before, after, instead of, on, since, when, while and in spite of.
Before cooking, you should wash your hands.
Instead of complaining about it, they should try doing something positive.
On arriving at the hotel, he went to get changed.
While packing her things, she thought about the last two years.
In spite of having read the instructions twice, I still couldn’t understand how to use it.
Do this exercise to test your grammar again.
- Grammar test 2
Hello SonuKumar
This is a structure that some people might say from time to time, but it's fairly unusual in most situations. First of all, it's a bit academic, and in most writing other than transcriptions of a conversation between people (for example, in a story), it would be considered a sentence fragment rather than a complete sentence.
It would normally be at the end of a sentence, and preceded by a semi-colon or dash. In such a case, it would essentially be a kind of adverbial participle phrase. For example: 'She and I have the same tastes apart from one small difference -- the difference being that I don't like juice and she does.' As you have suggested, it means something like 'She and I have the same tastes except for one difference. The difference is that I don't like juice and she does.'
As a sentence fragment, 'being' doesn't replace the verb 'is' or 'are'. There is no main verb in the sentence as you copied it above, which is why we call it a sentence fragment in such a case. When it's part of a sentence (as in my example above), it's a phrase and so doesn't have a main verb.
I hope this helps you make sense of it.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kaisoo93
It's not correct to begin the participle clause with 'they'. The sentence is difficult to understand as it is; I'm not sure where you found it, but I wouldn't take it as a model.
Your version of the sentence about the bomb is not correct. You could write 'The building being destroyed, the bomb exploded' but the meaning would be different -- it would mean that since the building was destroyed, the bomb exploded. That doesn't make much sense to me, but the grammar is not incorrect.
I'm sorry, but we can't provide explanations of sentences that don't come from our website. They are not always correct and we can't explain why other people write the way they do, especially when the grammar is non-standard.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Jasmina,
The correct option for your first example is the first one (Born in, ...). This is because it is neutral in the sense that it simply provides information. The other two options suggest a causal link - that Donald Duck became the world's most famous because he was born in 1934.
The second example is similar. The second and third options suggest a causal link of some kind, while the first is simply a factual statement. The difference between the second and third options is that the second describes the situation at the moment (a fact about Disneyland now) whereas the third focuses on how that situation came to pass. It's a difference in emphasis and depends really on the speaker's intention and the context.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kaisoo93,
The naming here is complex and there are different views. Some hold that non-defining relative clauses cannot be reduced, and so an example like this is a post-modifying adjectival construction which is not a relative clause. Others would say that it is a non-defining relative clause and so they can be reduced.
Personally, I don't consider the labelling of structures and the formulation of strict rules to be the most important thing. A descriptive approach which identifies the structure and its use is preferable in my opinion. Here, we have a past participal post-modifying the subject of the sentence and providing additional, non-essential, information. Whether or not you see it as a reduced relative clause or as an alternative to a relative clause is really not important.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team