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 Liam_Kurt,
It's an interesting question without a clear answer as you can see from these discussions on StackExchange:
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/246170/when-to-put-a-comma-before-participial-phrase
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/301499/comma-before-adverbial-participial-phrases-reduced-adverbial-phrases-and-parti
In my view there are two things to consider. First, a comma is often required when the participle does not refer to the item immediately before it. For example, your first sentence is ambiguous: if you do not include 'while' and if the context does not make it clear then it is not apparent whether it is 'I' who is living in Africa or the 'rare animals' who are living in Africa.
You can read more about this view here:
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/162594/comma-with-participle-clause
The second element is whether the participle clause is restrictive or non-restrictive. For examples and explanations see here:
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/articles/commas-with-participial-phrases/
I hope that helps to shed some light on the topic. It's a tricky one and quite nuanced.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear teacher,
I have three questions on participial phrases; I would be happy if you could clarify them all (I'm asking to learn).
1. What is the difference between participial phrases and absolute constructions?
2. Are the past and perfect participial phrases interchangeable?
Let’s consider some of your example sentences:
Looked after carefully, these boots will last for many years.
Can we rewrite this as: Having being/been looked after carefully, these [the] boots will last for many years.
Consider this also: Having been made redundant, she started looking for a new job. There are two issues in this case: 1) why is the sentence wrong if we replace "been" with "being"? And 2) is the word "having" not even redundant in the sentence since the meaning is the same when written as: been made redundant, she started looking for a new job?
3. The below though is not among your example sentences, but can you help clarify it?
Should Peter be made the head of the learnEnglish team, given his mastery of the English language, you can bet that the platform would rank top among its class. In this sentence, can the word "giving" replace "given"?
Hello Georgesj,
1. The Wikipedia entry for absolute constructions has a very clear explanation of this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_construction
+ + + + +
2.
The sentence can be rewritten as 'Having been looked...' (not 'having being looked') However, there is a difference in meaning. The original sentence describes an action in the future. It has a similar meaning to 'If you look after these carefully then...'. The second sentence describes an action in the past. It has a similar meaning to 'Since these were looked after carefully in the past, they will...'
The sentence is wrong because there is no form which allows 'having being'. You could replace 'having been' with 'being' but this would then be context-dependent as to whether it describes a current (present) situation or a past situation - a common ambiguity with -ing participles.
'Been made redundant' is not a correct sentence.
+ + + + +
3.
No. 'Given' has a passive meaning here (the knowledge is given to us or considered by us). An -ing form would require a verb which could have an active meaning - something we could do - such as 'remembering', 'bearing in mind', 'considering' etc.
I hope those answers are clear. One note on the question: we are a small team here offering a free service and we try to answer as many questions as we can. We ask users to keep their questions as short as possible as our time is quite limited. Long questions like this with multiple examples and follow-ups tend to wait in the queue longer than short, precise questions so the latter are much preferred and will be answered more promptly.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear author:
I want to ask you some question about past participle clause.
Can we use the past participle clause to express a result?
Such as in this sentence:"He dropped something to the floor, scolded by his parents."
If the past participle expresses a result, It means "He dropped something to the floor, so he was scolded by his parents".But if the past participle expresses a reason, it means "He dropped something to the floor, because he was scolded by his parents".
I don't know which one is correct.
I konw if it is a present participle, we can use it to express both result and reason. Such as: The movie star made a dramatic entrance, attracting everyone’s attention.（the present participleclause shows the result）
Being done in a hurry, the exercises were full of mistakes.（the present participleclause shows the reason）
But some people consider if it is a past participle clause, it only shows the reason of the main sentence, and it doesn't show a result of the main sentence.
They consider it is because the past participle expresses the event which has been completed when the main action happen, but the result is usually happen after the main action. Therefore the past participle can't express a result.
I don't know does it right? I wish to know your idea about why past participle clause can't show a result. Thank you so much.
Such as in this sentence:"He dropped something to the floor, scolded by his parents." In this sentence, some people consider it means he had been scolded by his parents when he dropped something, So it only means "He drop something to the floor, because he was scolded by his parents" . And they think "He dropped something to the floor, so he was scolded by his parents" is a wrong interpretation for the sentence. Do you agree that?
Thanks a lot for your help.
Hi Devin,
Past participle clauses express reasons, but not results. In your example, the only possible meaning is that "scolded by his parents" is the reason for dropping the thing.
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Dear Jonathan,
Thanks a lot for your reply. Could you tell me why past participle clauses express reasons, not results? Is it because past participle shows the action happened before the main sentence? Or it is just a using habit of English language, people don't know why it is.
Hi Devin,
Yes, right - the past participle shows that the action already happened, with reference to the action in the main clause. Aside from the 'reason' usage, past participle clauses can also show something taking place as the same time as the main clause action (e.g. Filled with pride, he walked towards the stage). But past participle clauses can't show a result (i.e. something caused by and occurring after the main clause action).
I hope that answers your question.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Thanks a lot, now I understand. Best wishes for you.
Dear author,
Are sentences containing participles considered to be complex ones considering the participles as 'clauses'?
Hi Tama511226,
It really depends on how "clause" and "complex sentence" are defined. Different grammar models do this in different ways. My point of view is similar to Peter's (see his comment below in reply to Babar205).
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team