Participle clauses
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!
I believe there is a mistake on identifying the participle clause as a whole but also the use of the present participle is wrong in the sentence you provide. The sentence reads as follows:
Republicans have previously tried to get English designated as the US’s official language, with members of the House introducing legislation that failed in 2021.
I ONLY identity this part: “(…) with members of the House introducing legislation that failed in 2021.” as the participle clause. My explanation is a bit nuanced but it was only this way that I could make sense of it…
First, I believe that instead of using the present participle: “introducing”, a perfect participle: “having introduced” should be used. From what I can analyze, the construction of the clause aims for an emphasis on the legislation rather than the House, so the subject or the “doer” of the clause is not that relevant; therefore, the use of a passive form is suggested (as explained by this lesson, the perfect participle can be used to make an active or passive voice). Secondly, why not use a past participle clause if passive will be used? Because in order to maintain the use of with we must use a perfect participle clause, and because it is our aim not to change much of the original text. Finally, it is more economical and is of higher proficiency (just like the purpose of using participle clauses) than to write: Republicans have previously tried to get English designated as the US’s official language, the members of the House introduced a legislation but the legislation failed in 2021.
So, to conclude the sentence would end up like this:
Republicans have previously tried to get English designated as the US’s official language, with members of the House having introduced a legislation that failed in 2021.
What are your thoughts? And in any case you still find this clause not a form of participle, what form should you propose? Moreover, do remember that natives commit mistakes, so even a respected journal or journalist might not be grammatically coherent, also, we do not really know whether the text was revised and approved by a grammar specialist.
Best of regards, Nyree.
Hello Nyree,
Strictly, the participle clause begin with the participle (introducing) which modifies the noun phrase preceding it. However, the user was interested in the use of the construction 'with + noun + participle' so that was the focus of the answer.
The use of a present participle is fine here. As I said in my initial answer, a perfect participle can be used instead, but it is not necessary. A past participle could also be used here: ...with legislation introduced (by them/by Republicans) in... This would have a passive meaning, as you say, and is an option. A perfect form is also possible: ...with legislation having been introduced (by...) in...
As you can see, there are many options; the choice is up to the author and depends on the emphasis they wish to place.
Note also that 'legislation' is uncountable, so there is no indefinite article before it.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello dear teacher🙋🏽♂️
Participles are verbs?
Hello jassa,
Yes, participles are forms of the verb but they have some of the qualities of verbs and of adjectives depending on how they are used.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Thanks dear teacher.
Good evening. I am wondering if i can interpret that there is a conjunction "and" in explanation no 1 and 3?
1. To add information about the subject of the main clause (past)
Filled with pride, he walked towards the stage.
2. 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.
3. To add information about the subject of the main clause (present)
Starting in the new year, the new policy bans cars in the city centre.
Explanation no 1 and 3, to me, is like "and" conjunction because it seems the particle clause exists in parallel
Thanks
Hello LittleBlue89,
It's certainly true that the participle clauses here add information about the subject or the action(s). However, they also carry more meaning. For example:
This does not just tell us that two things are true. It also suggests a link between them: his pride and his going towards the stage are connected in some way. Perhaps one is caused by the other, or perhaps they share a cause - the context should make this clear.
The participle clause here is more like a relative or adjective clause in that it adds information about the subject: The new policy, which starts in the new year, bans...
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi,
I would like to ask about the difference in these sentences. Sometimes I'm confused whether to use the present, present perfect or the past participle clause.
Worried by the news, she called the hospital.
Being worried by the news, she called the hospital.
Worrying about the news, she called the hospital.
Thanks,
Veronika
Hi Veronika,
All options here are grammatically correct.
The first and the second versions ('Worried by...' and 'Being worried by...') have a passive meaning (she is worried) and both make the causal connection clear: we understand that she called because she was worried. I would say that the first option is the most natural and likely, while the second is less common. It might suit a more formal or a more literary context.
The third form has an active meaning (she is worrying) and does not make the causal connection explicit. She may be phoning because she is worried, or she may just be worried at the same time as the call. Of course, in this context we are likely to guess that there is a connection but in a different context the two actions may be merely simultaneous and not connected.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Veronika,
The first sentence sounds the most natural and correct to me.
Thanks.
Shetu Yogme.