
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 Lucas_xpp,
All of those alternatives are possible. They do not change the meaning in each case, so the choice is one of style and emphasis.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kapil Kabir,
You need to have clauses which match in form, so if the first clause includes ...not because... then the second clause needs to include ...but because...::
If the first clause contained ...not that... then the second clause would contain ...but that...:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kaisoo93,
The sentence is ambiguous. It could mean that the man is breaking the window as he chases the boy, or that the boy is breaking the window while he is being chased. Either way, the suggestion is that the breaking and the chasing are simultaneous. Obviously, the context would suggest something else, but that is what the grammatical structure implies. That is why the most likely form would be '...who broke...', which avoids these issues.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Rama Tb,
The form is not passive in form. It has a passive meaning, which is not the same thing. The form is a past participle (filled) and participle are examples of nonfinite verb forms, meaning they lack tense, mood and voice.
The subject of the main clause (He) is not performing the action. He does not fill anything; he is filled. That is why we say it has a passive meaning. By contrast, present participles have an active meaning. For example:
Here, he is filling his mother with pride, not being filled with pride.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again Reemtb,
Past participles in these clauses often have a passive meaning and present participles often have an active meaning. I wouldn't focus on adjecctives, to be honest, as it's the meaning which matters, not whether or not a given word is an adjective or a verb. In your example, filled is a passive verb form, in my opinion, rather than an adjective.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi gramgal,
The present is fine here as you are talking about a present situation. The hypothetical part of the sentence is that your friend is not 'here'; the rest of the sentence describes a real present as it is written.
There are some other things to correct in the sentence: it should be friend's or friends' rather than the form without an apostrophe.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Maxim,
Yes, it's possible to understand the sentence both ways!
Normally, though, listeners would understand walking through the park as describing the girl, because the words are right next to each other.
If you actually mean that it was me (the speaker) who was walking through the park, this wouldn't be the best way to say it because it's confusing. It needs to be rephrased to make it clearer, as you suggested.
I hope that helps :)
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Xxx,
Yes, it is a correct sentence. But it's a bit hard to understand for a reader or listener. It's unusual to have a single word (cooking) as the present participle clause.
Other options would be more commonly used. -ing clauses often follow conjunctions or prepositions (see above for more examples), so this would be a clearer and more common way to say it:
Does that make sense?
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kapil Kabir,
Yes, this is an imagined situation. Had seen is correct here: ... as if she had seen me before. It needs to be in the past perfect (not past simple), to show that that action (seeing me) happened before the other actions (I was surprised / the hostess smiled).
Check our page on the past perfect for more information about this: https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/intermediate-to-upper-intermediate/past-perfect
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kapil Kabir,
If you do a search for this topic (comparative adverbs or superlative adverbs) you'll find a page devoted to the topic which answers your question:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar-reference/comparative-and-superlative-adverbs
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kapil Kabir,
1 is correct and 2 is not. Instead of 1, you could also say 'Some students are gone' (which means the same thing). You can read an explanation of this in the Members of groups section of our Quantifiers page.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Ahmed Imam,
The sentence needs a correction: Someone knocked at the door while I was having my breakfast.
The two actions are done by different people. The sentence structure is: Someone X while Y (X and Y are the two actions). Since the first word is Someone, and no other person is mentioned, it would be understood that Someone does both X and Y. But this is not the right meaning. It must be me who is having my breakfast.
Does that make sense?
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kapil Kabir,
Good question. Only the first option is correct. In this situation, the man owns the shop. For the meaning of owning or possessing something, we usually use the possessive ('s), especially when the noun is a living thing. So, a man's shop is correct and a shop of the man isn't correct.
The second one is also missing a determiner before man, as you said.
Does that make sense?
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kapil Kabir,
In a man's shop, the article a describes man (not shop), so man has an article. It would be reworded as the shop of a man (not a shop of the man).
In other words, shop is definite (since it is described by a man's), and man is indefinite (not the other way round). Before shop, the phrase a man's functions as a determiner, so no other article/determiner is needed before shop.
(As mentioned above, though, for the meaning of possession, we would usually use 's. If we change the example to a non-living thing, it might be clearer, e.g.: the front of the building, a page of the book, the roof of the house.)
I hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
No worries, Kapil Kabir :) Glad to help.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Kapil Kabir,
Half is a versatile word! It can be various word types.
Noun (e.g. He played the first half of the match; an hour and a half; two halves of an apple)
As a noun, half is countable. It can have an article before it. After it, there can be an of phrase (which can have an article in it). Sentence 4 isn’t correct because the noun money needs an article before it.
Pronoun (e.g. He played half of the match; half of us; I only want half)
As a pronoun, there can’t be an article before half. But after it, there can be an of phrase (which can have an article in it). Sentence 6 is this usage, and it's correct.
Adjective (e.g. a half century; a half hour)
This comes before a noun. There can be an article before it (depending on the noun), but not after it. Sentences 2 and 3 aren’t correct. I think it’s because the noun needs to be countable (but money is uncountable).
Determiner (e.g. The journey takes half an hour; half my life; half the world)
To be precise, half is a predeterminer. That means it comes before another determiner (e.g. an article, or a possessive adjective). It doesn’t have an article before it. So, sentence 5 is correct. Sentence 1 isn’t correct because money is uncountable.
I hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello giangphan,
The phrase you ask about is a reduced relative clause, i.e. a reduced form of '... physical state, which has led to the assertion that they are immortal' (or the verb could be in a different tense).
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi giangphan,
This is an example of a reduced relative clause. It is a non-defining relative clause which describes not the noun preceding it, but rather than whole clause:
Which refers to (the fact that) most of the bodies were badly burnt.
Reduced, we end up with making most of...
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again giangphan,
When the relative clause describes the whole clause before, we can reduce it to a participle:
When the relative clause describes the subject of the main clause, we can also use a participle:
However, when the relative clause refers to the object of the main clause, we cannot reduce it:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Ujin,
It's because of the expression 'spend time'. We spend time doing something (see the third example sentence under entry 1.2 time); in this case, users spend 13% of their time watching or listening.
There is no real reason for this -- it's just what we say. With the expression 'take time', for example, we use an infinitive: 'it took four hours to clean the kitchen'.
The best thing to do is check how verbs are used in a good dictionary, like the one I linked to.
We're glad to hear that you've found LearnEnglish useful -- that's what we're here for!
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Ujin,
While I expect you could find that sentence or one similar to it in writing somewhere, if it were my text, I would edit it because, as you point out, it's a unclear. I understand the intended meaning to be 'globalization is driven by ...' and 'globalization results in ...'
I don't think it's worth analysing the grammar behind it, as it's not clear and isn't a very good model in my opinion. I would rewrite the sentence and perhaps even split it into two.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team