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 SonuKumar,
There is no clear relationship between running away and seeing Priya. Normally there needs to be some kind of causal or other relationship. For example, 'How did he become a millionaire? -- He did it by playing the lottery every day'. 'playing the lottery' shows how 'he did it'.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello SonuKumar,
As you say, 'take place' is an intransitive verb so it would not be used with a passive meaning.
Please note that we generally do not deal with sentences taken from elsewhere as we are not responsible for their content or language choices. We're happy to comment on our own material and explanations, of course.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi qayum2s,
When 'will' is used after 'if' like this, it typically means either 'be willing to'. Here the idea appears to be that if people were just willing to take the time to look, they would find there is enough love. It's also possible for 'will' to mean something like 'it is true now that' -- for example, 'If you really will help me paint the house, I will wait for you'.
I probably would have left out the comma in that sentence; I'm afraid I don't know how to explain that writer's choice other than to note that there is quite a bit of variation in punctuation.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello quayum2s,
The correct way to express this is a little different:
I have been to New York and to London too/as well.
We can use 'so' when we want to provide an alternative to the subject of the first sentence:
I have been to New York.
So has Bob. / Bob has been to New York too.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi qayum2s,
The first sentence is correct and sounds natural to me. The second one just needs the word 'money' (or some other object) after the verb 'owed', since it is generally a transitive verb (which means it requires a direct object): 'the man I owed money to'.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Muhammad Erad,
We'd need a bit of context to be able to answer that question. Could you please provide a full sentence and explain the ideas that come before and after it?
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello SonuKumar,
We do not add 'by' here. You can rewrite the sentence using 'when' and a finite verb:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Serhan677099,
There are problems with many of these examples. The relationship between participle phrases and conjunctions is complex. Sometimes it is possible to use a participle phrase after a conjunction. Sometimes it is not. And sometimes the conjunction is necessary. Some conjunctions are very rarely or never used with participle phrases.
The conjunctions which can be often with participle phrases include after, before, since, when, while, whenever, once, until, on, without, instead of, in spite of and as.
I will comment on each of your sentences briefly below. However, please note that we generally do not answer questions which contain lists of different examples. We're happy to answer shorter questions but this kind of question is really something which you should address to a teacher so that he or she can adequately explain the various issues involved. With many thousands of users on LearnEnglish and only a small team to deal with questions, it's not possible for us to provide this kind of individual help, unfortunately.
These sentences are not correct. You could omit if and simply use the participle, or you could use a finite verb:
Studying hard, I could pass the exam.
If I studied hard, I could pass the exam.
Having studied hard, I could pass the exam.
As I had studied hard, I could pass the exam.
This sentence is fine.
The contrast provided by although is key to the sense of the sentence and so we cannot simply remove it. You could use a preposition like despite or in spite of (with a gerund rather than a participle to follow it), or you could use a finite verb instead of the participle, as in the first sentence (Although he had...):
Despite visiting Rome, he didn't remember anything about it.
This sentence is fine. It tells us that she is being visited.
This sentence is grammatically correct but has a different meaning. In this sentence, he is visited by her friends; in the sentence above she was visited by her friends.
This is fine. Here he is being visited.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Helen31,
A perfect participle is formed with [having + past participle]: having slept, having eaten, having spoken. It indicates an action which was completed in the past.
You can form perfect participles with transitive verbs (with an object) or intransitive verbs (without an object), so an object is not always required. For example:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello ifencing,
There are some problems with the sentences:
Condition
Went to Paris tomorrow, you will attend the meeting.If you go to Paris tomorrow, you will attend the meeting.
The problem here is that you are trying to use 'went' as a passive form, just as 'Look after carefully' in the example is a passive form. However, the verb 'go' does not have a passive form because it is an intransitive verb.
The use of participles for conditions is quite unusual. The meaning is 'provided that...' or 'in the case that...' and establishes a requirement for the result, rather than describing possibility.
Reason
Wanting to go away, he left the concert.
He wanted to go away so he left the concert.
Grammatically, this is fine. However, it is rather trivial and repetitive. Leaving is the same as going away, so there is no real reason provided here. The participle should tell us something rather than simply repeat the information in the main clause. For example, you could say Wanting to be alone, ...
Result
It being late, he bolted the windows.
Because it’s late, he bolted the windows.
This is fine.
Time
Singing the song, the doorbell rang.When I was singing the song, the doorbell rang.
This sentence is incorrect. Remember that the actor is the same for both parts of the sentence, so your sentence suggests that the doorbell was singing the song. The sentence could read Singing the song, I heard the doorbell.
Please note that we generally do not provide this kind of extended feedback. We're happy to answer questions about our material and about English in general but we have many thousands of users and are a small team, so providing comments on lists of sentences is not generally possible for us, unfortunately.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello ifencing,
Yes, all of those are grammatically correct. The participle is a non-finite verb form and has no time reference of its own. It takes its time reference from the verb in the main clause.
Obviously, whether or not the sentence makes sense will depend upon the context in which it is used.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello eliskh,
That's correct -- this section only have explanations, but no exercises. Most of our English Grammar pages do have exercises.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi SonuKumar,
Although its position after 'doorway' suggests that 'heading' tells us about the doorway, here it refers to the subject because doorways don't move, whereas people do. If the sentence were something like 'I ran into Priya going home', it could be that I was going home or it could be that Priya was -- in this case, both subject and object of 'ran into' are people so that is possible.
To make it clear, you could say 'Going home, I ran into Priya', though the truth is, people more often say something like 'I ran into Priya when I was going home' or 'I ran into Priya when she was going home'.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Zhverb,
As the information on the page above says, we use past participles to express a passive meaning and present participles to express an active meaning.
I have no idea which post you are referring to and we don't comment on information from other sites but I have never heard of any kind of rule like that. In fact, your example about the American Civil War is perfectly fine as an example of a present participle with an active meaning and demonstrates that finished non-repeated actions can be reduced. You could change 'the events' to 'the event' or 'the decision' and the sentence would be perfectly fine.
Your second example can be written using either form:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Zhverb,
No, that would not be correct. The time reference of the participle is the same as the verb in the main clause, so if the verb in the main clause has a present time reference (is chasing) then the participle would also refer to the present. Thus this sentence would mean 'He is chasing the boy who is breaking the window'.
The sentence would also suggest that the actions are simulaltaneous - that the boy is breaking the window while he is being chased. This would be true even if the verb was a past form. Thus 'He was chasing the boy breaking the window' would mean that the action occurred in the past, but that the actions were simulataneous - i.e. 'He was chasing the boy who was breaking the window'.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Milhki,
'By' is a preposition and introduces a prepositional phrase. Prepositional phrases with 'by' show the method by which something is achieved. The prepositional phrase here is perhaps a little confusing because it is so long but we can simplify it easily enough and then it is clear that it is a straightforward prepositional phrase:
The prepositional phrase here has an adverbial function as it modifies the verb 'reduce'.
I would say that a comma is preferable to a dash in this sentence.
LearnEnglish is a site for people learning English as a means of communication rather than as a site for linguistic analysis. For questions like this you might find the relevant section of stackexchange helpful:
https://ell.stackexchange.com/
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kamran Saif Qureshi,
That is correct. The present participle shows an action which happened at the same time as another action, as you say. Well done.
Best wishes,
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kamran Saif Qureshi
The British Council does not offer recommendations regarding books, I'm afraid. We do not favour or advertise any publishers or authors. My suggestion would be to go to a good bookshop and find three or four different grammar books. Open each to the page for participle clauses/phrases and compare the information there. You'll be able to see which is the most accessible and complete, and which would be the best for you.
Best wishes,
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello curiouslearner,
'beleaguered' is an adjective here, not part of a passive construction. The second meaning of the two that you list is the correct one here.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello jarurote,
It is possible to change the order and begin the sentence with 'having'.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'could we use this passage'. There are several errors in there if your question is about the accuracy of the language. However, we don't provide a correction service on LearnEnglish but rather answer questions about how the language works and specific aspects of the language system.
Best wishes,
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello SonuKumar,
There is a slight difference in meaning which might be relevant in some contexts.
'Having made...' and 'With... made' place the run-making before the winning. In other words, the runs were achieved before the match was won.
'Making...' could also mean that the match was won during the run-making. In other words, there was no need to wait until later for the win; the two actions co-occurred.
In most contexts (and certainly in this one) the forms are interchangeable. However, the dfference above could be important in some contexts.
Best wishes,
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello souba73,
The use of past participles in this way is quite correct. The participle has a passive form, and so the subject is 'coat':
You can find many examples of this construction in English. For example, here is a quote from Walt Whitman, one of the greatest writers in American literature:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello souba73,
The sentence is perfectly fine and I don't see any awkwardness in it. Participle clauses (as described on the page above) are efficient ways to combine information which might otherwise be in two different sentences. There are numerous examples already on the page with both present and past participles. Perhaps you can try to create more examples and we'll be happy to tell you if they are correct or not.
Please note that we respond to questions as soon as we are able. We have many users on the site and are a small team here providing a service free of charge. Posting reminders or pressing us to answer your question sooner only slows the process.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello SonuKumar,
Using the present participle like this implies that mixing the powder and water and soaking your clothes are the same thing. They are not the same thing, so the sentence is confusing.
The sentence with the past participle works, as it shows the powder has already been mixed in to the water.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team