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 Nevi,
I'd say that 'her wanting to live alone' is a noun phrase; it's the same structure as 'her desire to live alone'; that is, 'wanting' is a noun, just like 'desire' is.
Note that you could also say 'Her wanting to live alone is understandable' -- in this case, the clause is also a noun phrase plus the verb 'be' plus an adjective.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
Yes, 'wanting' is a gerund in this case.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Nevı,
Yes, that's right :)
But for your example, I would say one of these versions instead:
The reason is that a gerund (e.g. studying) is somewhere between a verb and a noun (see this comment thread for a more detailed explanation). If you add a possessive adjective, it makes it more noun-like than verb-like, and nouns have a preposition before an object - that's why I added 'of' in the second sentence.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Mussorie,
I think the first two forms can be used interchangeably. The third one does not look correct to me as a UK English speaker.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Mussorie,
The first two sentences can be used interchangeably, which means there is no difference in meaning between them. The third sentence is not a correct form, so there is no meaning to explain.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Nevı,
It isn't possible with all conjunctions, but it is commonly used after when. The past participle clause describes the subject of the main clause (i.e., She became very tearful when (she was) pressed to talk about it). The past participle clause normally has a passive meaning, and when shows that the two actions happened at or around the same time.
Here are some more examples.
I hope that helps.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Nevi,
A present participle (-ing) can describe the result of an action, but it's important to remember that the participle's action always refers back to the subject of the main clause. For example:
The bomb exploded, destroying the building.
It is the bomb which is doing the destroying here.
Your sentences contain past participles (-ed), which have a passive meaning. You could describe a result using a present participle:
He was late to class for the third time this week, causing him to be suspended / resulting in his suspension from his school
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi.
To be precise, the participle here refers to the action performed by the man: being late for class caused him to be suspended.
In participle clauses, the participle does not introduce a new actor. Whatever it describes refers to the same actor as that in the main clause.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
Yes, in this example, 'which' refers to the whole first clause.
Please note that the wording of the relative clause is a little awkward. I'd recommend 'which is the reason he's been suspended' or something like that.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Arafat,
In each pair, the correct form is with -ing (present participle).
The present participle has an active meaning, while the past participle (-ed) has a passive meaning. In your examples an active meaning is required: it is the bomb which explodes and the participants who break the rules.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Nevi,
That sentence is fine.
When the participle clause comes at the start we separate it with a comma, as you say. When the participle clause comes after the main clause the comma is optional and is generally a stylistic choice. Using a comma suggests a spoken pause, which can add emphasis to the action in the participle clause.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
These are examples of participle clauses, which are not the same as relative/adjective clauses. Compare:
The first sentence is a non-defining relative clause. As you say, it cannot be reduced. The relative clause provides additional information about the noun.
The second sentence is a participle clause. It does not provide additional information about Harry Kane but rather describes an action in progress at the time of the first action.
I think you'll see the difference if you look at this example, where only one form is possible:
You cannot use a participle clause here because the actions are not simultaneous: living in Italy is a general state, not an action at the same as time as my seeing him.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again Nevi,
Yes, that is a participle clause. A relative clause here would be a defining relative clause identifying which officer is being described (the officer who... and not another officer). Here, however, the participle is describing the action being performed in the video.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again Nevi,
You're right that we do often use verbs related to perception or visualisation with participle clauses. This is because their meaning lends itself to describing actions in progress. When we see something it is generally doing something. The acts of seeing/showing/watching etc are by their nature interruptions: they happen during another action or state.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Ahmed Imam,
The second sentence is grammatically correct but unlikely. It describes flowers which are growing now. The speaker might be looking out of their window at a panorama of the city and describing how beautiful the flowers are. However, London is such a large place that it seems unlikely it would be used as a location in this way, unless 'London' is a shortened reference for a certain place within the city rather than the whole city itself.
The first sentence is ambiguous. It could refer to some flowers which were grown in London and have been cut, or it could describe the flowers of London more generally: the flowers which are grown in London.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Ahmed Imam,
Yes, those are perfectly fine sentences. As ever, whethere or not they are appropriate will depend on the context and the speaker's intention.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
In brief, it's because that's how we use the word 'choked'. Although many adjectives are formed from the past participle of a verb, they don't always have the same meaning as the verb and so can't be used in the way you've tried to use 'choked' in your sentence.
As far as I know, there are no patterns to this -- that is, I'm afraid there's no general rule that explains if or how you can use a past participle as an adjective. That's what the dictionary is for.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
'choke' can be transitive or intransitive. The way the sentence is written, I understand 'choke' to be transitive (which means someone else tried to kill the man) and the beginning as a reduced version of 'The man who was choked ...'
But I doubt that's what you meant. If you want 'choke' to be intransitive -- in other words, the man chokes on food -- then I'd recommend saying 'The man who choked on some food in the restaurant ...' instead.
As far as I know, there's no rule that explains this difference. It's a matter of usage.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Andi,
I'd say they are gerunds here. Those two activities are aspects of the job of showing the clothes in the best possible light.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi Andi,
Yes, they are objects of the verb 'means'.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Maahir,
I'm sorry to hear that you found the explanation inaccessible. You could try this Free Dictionary page, but I also wanted to say that I'd probably recommend you study other grammar before devoting too much time to this. This is because unless you need to write or speak in formal contexts, participle clauses are probably something you don't need to be able to produce yourself.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nevi,
Relative clauses have an adjectival function: they provide further information about a noun, and they directly follow the noun phrase which they describe. This is the function we can see in your example, where 'using Google's advertising sales technology' describes the noun phrase 'Small publishers' and cannot be moved to another position in the sentence.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello again Nevi,
Unless the context indicates otherwise, we assume that the time reference is consistent with the rest of the sentence. That would mean a present meaning.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team