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
Hi jujululuw,
You cannot omit the relative pronoun in either sentence.
Relative pronouns can be omitted when they are not the subject of the verb in the relative clause. For example:
In this sentence the verb in the relative clause is 'opened'. The subject is 'we'. Therefore, the relative pronoun can be omitted.
In this sentence (your sentence) the verb in the relative clause is 'are'. The subject is 'that'. Therefore, the relative pronoun cannot be omitted.
Your other sentence is similar: 'were' is the verb and 'that' is the subject.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello!
I have difficulty with the following sentence:
'Moving that quick his coat, bunching, tongues swirling like so many flames.'
I don't quite catch the meaning of what is written and don't understand why the commas are placed that way. Moreover, there seems to be no main clause in this sentence. This example is taken from the book "As I Lay Dying" by William Faulkner. To be honest, there are lots of difficulties for me in this book, therefore I will be very grateful if you help me with this sentence.
I attach the full paragraph with the above phrase:
“Come here, sir,” Jewel says. He moves. Moving that quick his coat, bunching, tongues swirling like so many flames. With tossing mane and tail and rolling eye the horse makes another short curvetting rush and stops again, feet bunched, watching Jewel. Jewel walks steadily toward him, his hands at his sides. Save for Jewel’s legs they are like two figures carved for a tableau savage in the sun.
Thank you in advance,
Assel Mukhtarova.
Hello Assel,
The short answer is that the sentence is not grammatical! It's part of a literary work and is written to create an impression rather than in accordance with strict grammatical rules. The best way to understand a sentence like this it is to think of it as a series of impressions - a series of images - rather than try to decipher it in terms of its grammatical structure.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello The LearnEnglish Team,
I have two sentences,
1. The term of
taste is
commonly
used when we
talk about
food.
2. The term of
taste is
commonly
used when we
are talking
about food.
Do they both have the same meaning ?
Does "The talking about food" in the second sentence express a continuous activity in the same way as the use of the present continuous tense ?
Thank You very much,
Parikenan.
Hello Parikenan,
In these sentences the simple form has the sense of 'whenever we do x' while the continuous form suggests 'during this activity'. Both are acceptable ways of looking at this and both are correct. I think it's really just a question of style in this case.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank You very much, Peter !
It is very clear now.
Parikenan.
No instances have so far been found in which a participle clauses are used as extraposed object. Hope there will be useful discussion on this topic.
Hi, Greetings,
My query is whether a present participle modifier can be used to modify another present participle modifier?
For eg. in the following sentence, the modifier gives the result of the action.
--A desecrated B, provoking riots.
Would the following be correct:-
-- A desecrated B, provoking riots, forcing the police to ......
Does the modifier " forcing the police to...." correctly modifies the modifier "provoking riots" as a result of it.
I want to understand whether there's a concept such as consecutive modifiers, a modifier modifying a previous modifier that modifies a previous clause.
Any suggestions will be immensely helpful
Hi rahul5843,
Yes, it's quite possible to build a sequence of consequences like this:
However, sentences like this are often ambiguous. It's not clear if we are talking about a range of consequences from a single event (x causes a, b, c and d) or a sequence of cascading consequences (x causes a, a causes b, b causes c and c causes d). To avoid this ambiguity we can use lexical markers:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Sir,
Is this sentence correct ? Knowing that he wouldn't be able to buy food on his journey, he took large supplies with him .If it is , how can we use knowing and it is a stative verb!