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 Abu,
I understand meaning 2 when I read the sentence. I have a hard time imagining meaning 1, not due to the grammar so much as the fact that it would be odd for the speaker to refer to themself as someone they themself can't deal with.
I think some of the ambiguity here comes from 'whose plans are reconsidered'. If it's not the speaker whose plans change very often, it would be clearer and more natural to use the active voice ('If you can't deal with people who change their plans every minute ...') than the passive, which we generally avoid unless there is a good reason to use it.
One possible reason to use the passive would be that the speaker is the one whose plans change a lot and so they are recommending to others who are upset with them to just stop making plans with them, which is a third meaning.
In any case, the context would probably make clear what was meant here.
I hope this helps!
Best wishes,
Kirk
LearnEnglish team
Hello again Kirk,
Thank you.
I have a question about this part:
"I have a hard time imagining meaning 1, not due to the grammar so much as the fact that it would be odd for the speaker to refer to themself as someone they themself can't deal with."
Could you please explain what indicates that the speaker and someone they refer to might be the same person?
I thought that the part "just stop planning any events involving them" might sound as if those people took part in the planning with the speaker, but I think now I see a problem here:
If we use an intransitive verb, it will probably sound okayish:
Abu
LearnEnglish team,
Which one of these two sententence is grammatically correct and makes sense:
If both of these are grammatically correct and make sense, what is the difference between the meanings they convey?
Thank you.
Hello ShetuYogme,
The first sentence is not correct. The phrase is 'in the hope of' and it is followed by a noun or an -ing form. Also, with 'glimpse' we usually say 'catch a glimpse', so the setences would be as follows:
These constructions have a similar meaning in that they explain your motivation or goal. There is a small difference, however. The phrase '...in the hope of...' tells us your motivation before you went - it tells us why you went to the concert in the first place. The present participle 'hoping' does not tell us why you went but rather what what you wanted to achieve once you set off.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Do both sentences express a reason or simultaneous actions happening at the same time?
Can I rephrase the second sentence as: 'Since his mother punished him, the boy refused to eat his dinner' (to show reason)? Or should I understand these sentences as describing actions happening at the same time?"
Hello. I'm Cieg. I'm having a problem with a problem with main clause and subordinating clause from these two sentences.
1. The children sang songs and danced very happily. They walked back home. (If we use participle phrase here) Walking back home, the children sang songs and danced very happily.
I think main clause would be about singing songs and dancing.
2.The children walked back home. They sang songs and danced very happily. (If we use participle phrase here) Singing songs and dancing very happily, the children walked back home.
I think main clause would be about children walking back home.
Are there any differences or are these sentences the same?
-With utmost respect,
Cieg
Hi Cieg,
The basic meanings are similar, but the focus in each sentence is different. In each sentence, the verb in the main clause is the main focus, and the participle clause verb is additional information about it.
I hope that answers your question.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Dear LearnEnglish team,
When I write the sentence "The clay in the granite has been blown, leaving behind the quartz." without using a participle clause, it appears as: "The clay in the granite has been blown, and it has been left behind the quartz."
In the second clause of the second sentence, the verb is passive (has been left). Could you explain why the present participle isn't passive when we reduce the second sentence into the first? Why isn't it like "... has been blown, being left behind the quartz"?
Thank you.
Hi Sep80,
In the expanded sentence, "it has been left behind" is not grammatical. It should be one of these:
The present participle clause "leaving behind the quartz" is the result or effect of an action. We look to the previous clause for the cause of this action (the cause is the whole of the previous clause about blowing up the clay).
Using the passive "being left behind" doesn't make sense here, because that would mean that the clause about blowing up clay was the receiver (rather than the doer) of the "leaving behind" action. In other words, the reader/listener would expect something like "being left behind by ..." and then the doer of the action to be mentioned, but it is not mentioned.
However, you could say this:
Here, "the quartz" is the passive receiver of the action "left behind".
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
LearnEnglish team
Dear teachers, why is this sentence (Taking a shower, I heard someone's phone ring) using 'ring' in its present simple form when the sentence is in past tense ('heard' is in its past simple form)?