LearnEnglish Hub
In our new Learning hub, you can put your language into practice. Take part in the activities and practise your English skills by writing comments, recording yourself speaking and sharing photos with descriptions.
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.
Read the explanation to learn more.
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.
Here are some common ways we use present participle clauses. Note that present participles have a similar meaning to active verbs.
Here are some common ways that we use past participle clauses. Note that past participles normally have a passive meaning.
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.
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.
Hi Rafaela,
I think I understand what you mean, but it sounds a little unnatural to me. I'd recommend something like 'Being someone who forgets grammar as time passes ...'
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello aria rousta,
There's a couple of things to unpack here. First of all, a reduced relative clause is not a participle clause; it remains a relative clause or, to use an alternative term, an adjectival clause. As this name implies, relative clauses have an adjectival function, while participle clauses have an adverbial function, as described on the page above. Relative clauses follow the noun which they describe; participle clauses are more flexible in their positioning.
In your example the correct reduction is this:
Here, 'stealing...' has an adjectival function (as it is a relative clause).
Having stolen could be used in a participle clause if we want to make it clear that the second act (going to jail) followed the first, and that there was a link between them. As you say, the participles in participle clauses have no time reference of their own but take one from the main verb or the context, so we can use having stolen with a future meaning, for example:
The speaker here may be imagining or predicting a theft in the future and explaining what the consequences will be.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Esmail Emon,
In the first four example sentences on this page, the order of the clauses is important. The first clause refers to an earlier condition that the second one is somehow related to.
For this reason, your sentence 1 isn't correct because the idea is that the explosion of the bomb caused the destruction of the building.
Your sentence 2 is fine.
As for your question about sentences 3 and 4, the precise meaning of participle clauses can't always be gleaned from the participle clause itself. As I mentioned above, generally the first part of the sentence states a cause or condition for the second one, but sometimes it's either your general background knowledge of how things work (e.g. generally if there is a bomb explosion and a building collapsing, probably the bomb caused the collapse) or the context (i.e. what is said before or after the sentence with the participle clause) that make the meaning clear. Though in some cases, the meaning isn't really clear, in which case it's generally better not to use a participle clause.
I hope this helps.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Esmail Emon,
I think this is a sentence open to several interpretations. In your two explanations/rephrasings (1 and 2), you see 'flanked' as part of a reduced relative clause (which are flanked), used adjectivally to describe the noun phrase 'narrow stone steps'. This is certainly one interpretation.
I think I would be more inclined, however, to say that the participle clause here has an adverbial function. It describes the verb 'run up'. The sentence can be seen as similar to these:
Here, the adverbial function is clear, I think.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team