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
Thank you so much!
I wish you good luck and success in your life.
Hello The LearnEnglish Team,
When is the right time ( situation ) to use "I would have thought" ?
Could you please give me some examples with sentences ?
Thank you very much,
Parikenan.
Hello Parikenan,
We use 'I would have thought' after expressing an opinion about the present or the future, especially with 'will'. It's similar to 'I expect' in meaning.
She'll be in the office, I would have thought.
We'll need a lot of money, I'd have thought.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
It is very clear now. Thank you very much, Peter.
Parikenan.
Dear Peter
Your explanation about would have pp, took me to first squer again after almost one year trying to realize exact meaning of this structure. Base on my understanding the main usages of this structure are as follow:
1- in hypothetical situation and third type of if cluase
2- in contrast with your explanation, I thought it would be used almost always in past tense when we want to talk about possible consequence of action that happened or not happend in reality.
3- to guess something that could have happened in the past, for example, the exam was so easy that students would have finished it in less than hour.
4- one of the good examples expressing well the asked question ( would have thought), could be this, who would have thought that Cronaviruse could have been affecting all aspects of our life for almost two years. ( it says nobody though this issue)
Please guide me in this respect, you may not believe that fully appreciation of this structure have become a nightmare for me.
Hello aria rousta,
I think that's a pretty good summary.
Please note that my comment earlier was not about 'would have + verb3' in general (as a grammatical construction) but rather about the specific phrase 'I would have thought' and how it is used in communication.
'Who would have thought' is used to show that something is extremely surprising, as you say. Like 'I would have thought' it is a particular expression with a particular communicative use rather than a typical grammar construction.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello The LearnEnglish Team,
I got this sentence, as written below, from the internet,
"either way" is
used for saying that it does not matter which of two things happens or is true, because the result will be the same.
Why don't they use "to" as a preposition here, so the sentence would be,
"either way" is used to saying that it does not matter which of two things happens or is true, because the result will be the same.
Thank you very much,
Hudi parikenan.
Hello Parikenan,
The form 'be used for' describes a thing's purpose: a pen is used for writing.
The form 'be used to' describes something which has become normal: I am used to my new house.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
It is very clear now. Thank you very much, Peter.
Sincerely yours,
Parikenan.
Hello teacher
Can I use present participle in this way to add information to the first clause?
"The figure for Food production in China was determined to be the highest one, rising from nearly 5 million tonnes to about 9 million tones between 2010 and 2012."
Thank you very much!
Hello datdo14102004 ,
Yes, the present participle 'rising' is fine here.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Can I remove the comma after the first clause? Is there any change in the meaning of the sentence if I do that?
Hello datdo14102004,
The comma is necessary. Without the comma, the participle would form part of a defining relative clause describing 'the highest one'. In other words, the sentence would be about the highest figure out of all those which are rising, rather than the highest figure, with some additional detail added.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi teachers,
Are adjectives -ed like "annoyed and tired" called past participle?
I read adjective with -ed on the other page, and it says "annoyed" cannot be put before noun. Is there any explanation for adjective -ed (or past participle) that can or cannot be put before nouns?
Thank you, sir.
Hello Risa warysha,
Past participles are a verb form, what is sometimes known as the 'third form'. Some past participles can be used as adjectives -- but not all -- and I'm afraid there is no easy rule to say which ones can be used this way.
When we talk about the position of adjectives (i.e. where they go in a sentence), we often use the terms 'attributive' and 'predicative'. The first one indicates a position before a noun (e.g. 'red shoes' or 'expensive car') and 'predicative' refers to an adjective used after a link verb (e.g. 'The sky is blue').
Most adjectives can be both predicative and attributive, but there are some that are only used in one way. 'annoyed' is an example of an adjective that is only predicative; others include 'asleep' and 'alone'.
You can read a bit more about this on https://www.lexico.com/grammar/attributive-and-predicative-adjectives
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello, Sir. You're doing a great job by sorting out our problems relating to grammar. Keep it up! Best wishes your way.
Now coming to my question.
1."Even as the US president has immense powers, the incumbent has the Congress breathing down his neck at all times and has to engage with its members."
Which structure is this: 'the incumbent has the Congrss breathing down'? What grammar rule does apply here? Please explain.
2." Like so many other issues relating to women's health in England, breast cancer is not a subject of serious discussion in the country, largely on account of social taboos."
Which phrase is this: 'largely on account of social taboos'? I didn't get the grammar rule behind it.
Regards.
Hi ali shah,
1. This structure is used to talk about things we experience which are currently in progress. The structure is: subject + have + object + -ing verb. Here are some more examples.
-- It's very hot. I have sweat running down my forehead.
-- I don't feel lonely because I have my friends sending me lots of messages.
-- When I worked in an office, I had people calling me all the time.
You can read more about this on this Cambridge Dictionary page. See the 'Talking about an experience' section: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/have-something…
2. This is a prepositional phrase, 'on account of + noun'. The adverb 'largely' is added at the front.
Thanks for your kind comments :) We are glad to hear that.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
''As Gorman finished her poem, four US presidents and first ladies, two former vice presidents and their spouses, dozens of lawmakers and scores of diplomats gave her a standing ovation, some struggling to hide their tears.''
What is the grammar behind using the last clause ''some struggling to hide their tears'?
Is it present participle? If yes, why didn't the writer use 'with' before 'some struggling...' as the participle has not the same subject as the main clause?
Please asnwer this, Sir.
Hello Wrakshamara,
You certainly could use 'with' here. However, you can also read the sentence as 'some of whom were struggling...'. This structure is often reduced in this way.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
''A new group of strangers crowded around, united by nothing more than the sound of a young American’s fingers on the keys.''
Is the second clause beginning with ''united by...'' a past participle clause , or is it a reduced relative clause(who are united by nothing...)?
Thanks and regards.
Hi Wrakshamara,
I think you can interpret it as either. They have identical forms and meanings here.
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
"Environmental disasters are pummelling the planet, intensely and frequently."
Sir, why has a comma been put before 'intensely and frequently'? Don't you think there shouldn't have been a comma before as those are not sentence adverbs?
Hello ali shah,
I'm afraid that I can't explain why the writer chose to write his sentence this way, but to me it looks like a way of lending emphasis to the two qualities of the effects of the disasters.
I do agree that it is a bit unusual, but it doesn't strike me as wrong. Some editors might ask the writer to change the sentence, but I'm afraid this is a topic we don't deal with on LearnEnglish.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello, Sir. Hope you're doing well. Let me put my query.
''All parties involved in this war were rival sovereign nodes, yet united in spilling blood on local streets.''
Is the second clause starting with 'yet united...' is the reduced form of 'yet they are united...'?
Thanks and regards.
Hello Wrakshamara,
I think the verb 'were' is applicable to both clauses here: "... yet [they were] united in..."
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
'I got calls telling me to be thankful that I had not been physically hurt, and I am.'
Would you please shed some light on the structure of this 'got calls telling me' phrase and the type of phrase it is?
Hello ali shah,
Here 'telling me to be thankful that I had not been physically hurt' is a present participle clause that adds information about the kind of calls received. It's similar in function to a relative clause in this way.
So the basic structure is 'I got calls' and then the clause beginning with the present participle 'telling' gives more information about those calls.
I hope this helps.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Thank you so much, Sir. God bless you!
Dear Sir. Hope you're doing well.
Please address the following query:
1.Widely seen as ‘father of the project’, Dr John experienced the ups and downs that come with being called a hero and a villain and then a hero in one lifetime.
Is the above sentence grammatically correct? Don't you think 'being' should have added before 'widely'? What does we call the first clause?
Hi ali shah,
Yes, it is grammatically correct! The 'widely seen' part is called a past participle clause. As the page above notes, past participle clauses normally have a passive meaning. So, that's why there's no 'being' here - this particular structure already contains this meaning. Have a look at the 'Past participle clauses' section on the page above for some more examples of this structure. I hope it helps :)
Jonathan
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello LearnEnglish Team
Why do consider participle clauses to be Upper Intermediate B2 level grammar?
I have participle clauses included in Advanced C1 English textbooks but never in Upper Intermediate B2 level.
Cheers
Adam
Hello Adam,
Level designations are always subjective. We consider participle clauses to be accessible for learners at this level. Of course, structures can be taught at different degrees of complexity: at lower levels the explanations may be simpler and avoid some of the more complex aspects; these can be introduced later when the topic is approached again.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello, LearnEnglish Team.
I want to know about the use of conjunction in participial construction.
Here is a sentence.
"Feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her notes."
In this participial construction, what the speaker intends to express is not clear. It can be variously interpreted in many ways.
Why? The speaker might want to say with Although, When, While, or Because.
I have been taught that I can put conjunction if I want to make it clearer.
Like below,
- Although feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her note.
- While feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her note.
- Because feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her note.
Are these three all right?
Of course, I know there is also a different grammatical form with the third one.
- Because of feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her notes.
( 'because of' works as a preposition, and 'feeling nervous' is a noun phrase.)
- Because feeling nervous, she was carefully studying her notes.
('because' works as a conjunction, and 'feeling nervous' is participial construction.)
In English grammar, especially in the field of participial construction,
Is 'because feeling nervous' wrong?
Or Can I use it?
Thanks in advance.
Hello Hyeyoung Min,
As you say, participle clauses/phrases can be ambiguous, though I think when placed in context rather than presented as isolated sentences the intended meaning is usually clear.
It is possible to use conjunctions like this. However, 'because' is not possible. After 'because' you need to use a subject-verb rather than just a participle:
~ Because she was feeling nervous...
'Because of' is also not possible. We follow 'because of' with a noun and not an -ing form:
~ Because of her nerves, ...
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello The LearnEnglish Team,
I have just read a sentence like this below,
I spent a whole day listening to the man who was a mechanic telling me a story about when he was young.
Are "listening and telling" in the sentence above participle ?
And can I interpret the sentence above as,
I spent a whole day, which listened to the man who was a mechanic who told me a story about when he was young.
Is that correct or wrong ?
Hello Parikenan,
It sounds to me as if you've understood the sentence correctly, and yes, I'd call both of those participles. In the first case, the verb 'spend' is often followed by a period of time (here 'a whole day') plus a participle that describes what the subject was doing during that time.
In the second case, verbs of perception (such as 'see', 'watch', and 'listen') can be followed by a participle or a bare infinitive that describes what is perceived. When the second verb is a participle, it puts more emphasis on the duration or a specific moment in time -- it's impossible to say without knowing the context or the speaker's intention.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Kirk,
In my comprehension about the sentence,
I interpret "listening" as a modifier that modifies a clause "I spent a whole day". In this case, I am using "which" after a comma to make sure that "listening" is modifying a clause.
And I interpret "telling" as a modifier that modifies a mechanic.
I just found out that one of the functions of a participle is for emphasizing the duration or a specific moment in time of something that is done by an object when the participle is put in the second verb as you mentioned above - in this case, how a mechanic tells a story about him when he was young. ( I hope I am not misinterpreting your explanation related to the function of a participle as a second verb )
Thank you very much, Kirk.
Hello Nevi,
Sentences like this can be ambiguous. You can often read the -ing form in two ways: adverbially describing the action in the main clause or adjectivally providing more information about the noun phrase which precedes it. I think that's the case here too. You can say that it is the act of signing the contract which will keep him at the club, or the contract which will keep him at the club. I think the second is more likely, as you say, but it is ambiguous.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Nicoletta,
I wouldn't say those are participle clauses. They are reduced forms of longer clauses which have become fixed expressions due to being used so frequently.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Rafaela1,
First of all, remember that participle clauses aren't used much in speech or writing -- it's really only in quite formal writing or very formal speaking that you find them. This means you probably won't find that you need to use them very often.
Assuming that you don't urgently need to learn to use participle clauses, I'd recommend that you look out for them as you listen to and read English. Write them down somewhere and analyse them using the explanation above. As you do this, I think you will start to remember the structures and thus be able to begin to use them. You're welcome to ask us for help if you have further questions.
How does that sound?
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
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